lakewoodhobo wrote:Funny how Trammell Crow just took the laziest step and proposed the exact same shopping center except without the big box... well, the added parking garage makes them Timber Creek Crossing Lite.
This is their way of saying FU to the neighborhood for killing their Sam's Club.
dallaz wrote:The proposed shopping center will be called “Market Station”.
Story from NBC 5 with attached video
https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/business/Re ... 65171.html
Warrior2015 wrote:What's wrong with these idiots ? Do they realize this is prime real estate right here ?!! This isn't Prosper or Allen. Geesh
TNWE wrote:
It is a car-dependent tract, no matter what gets built there.
This forum aside, most people who live close-in, in dense, walkable neighborhoods are still more than happy to hop in their car to go to walmart/chick-fil-a/In-n-out/West ELm etc. That's why TC wants to build retail there- to capture those wallets that are currently driving to shopping centers in the Northpark/Galleria/Preston Road corridors.
hjkll wrote:Isn’t Trammell Crow also doing 2000 Ross? It was supposed to have residential and now it doesn’t. TC is an anti urban company period.
Tucy wrote:hjkll wrote:Isn’t Trammell Crow also doing 2000 Ross? It was supposed to have residential and now it doesn’t. TC is an anti urban company period.
No. Trammell Crow is not doing 2000 Ross.
Tivo_Kenevil wrote:I also don't philosophically agree with what you're saying. Developments are capable of making things more walkable or connected. The fact Dart is inaccessible is because the area ignored integrating accessibility.
TNWE wrote:No, DART is inaccessible because it's a half-mile away from the station, and anyone who could afford to live in a hypothetical mixed-use residential development on the site is not going to accept that trade-off - they're just going to drive everywhere. No amount of zero lot line construction, wide, tree-lined sidewalks, or ground floor retail is going to change people's minds about walking the 10-15 minutes to DART in rain or 100 degree heat. If anything, they should court Target and the other retailers in the center adjacent to Cityplace tower to move to Market Station so that land can be redeveloped as mixed use apartments (close enough to actually be TOD).
Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Third, people use DART to get the shopping center nearby and the retail on the other side of Haskell already... There's Whataburger workers crossing the street all the time .. seriously.
You're right though, perhaps the jones' won't ride the train from that Tract.
But it is retail a center, and people work at retail centers and last I checked there are people who use DART to get to work.
Whether or not YOU would use it, based on your parking cost comparison is irrelevant; because there is always someone who will use the bus, train etc.
TNWE wrote:Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Third, people use DART to get the shopping center nearby and the retail on the other side of Haskell already... There's Whataburger workers crossing the street all the time .. seriously.
You're right though, perhaps the jones' won't ride the train from that Tract.
But it is retail a center, and people work at retail centers and last I checked there are people who use DART to get to work.
Whether or not YOU would use it, based on your parking cost comparison is irrelevant; because there is always someone who will use the bus, train etc.
I'm not talking about retail workers commuting *to* this development- their income level may not allow them the luxury of driving. I'm talking about hypothetical residents in a mid/high rise development on the site. Anyone who could afford to live in that neighborhood (or any transit-oriented development in DFW, really) can afford a car, so transit needs to be faster or more reliable to win over a significant number of users. If every transit trip (either DART or MATA) begins with a 15 min walk (maybe less if you're lucky enough to catch a bus or find a Bird Scooter nearby), that's a hard sell when driving to uptown/downtown via surface streets takes less time than it does to get to the station.
There's such a pathetically small number of people in Dallas who 1) have the income required to live in urban-style developments and 2) are willing to accept the tradeoffs of going car-free/transit-first for their mobility needs. Until that changes, developing this tract of land is going to generate additional car trips no matter what, and new residential is gonna dump a lot more cars on the road than building retail outlets that are closer than the ones Uptown Residents are already driving to today.
If the neighborhood is successful in stopping this plan, that land will just sit vacant until they realize the arrogance of trying to dictate what a developer can and can't build. TC has enough money to carry the property taxes until housing demand hits a point where they can't not develop it, but by then the people whining will have long-since been priced out of the area and the houses will be next up to get bulldozed and replaced with high-rises anyway. Pyrric victory for them...
TNWE wrote:Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Third, people use DART to get the shopping center nearby and the retail on the other side of Haskell already... There's Whataburger workers crossing the street all the time .. seriously.
You're right though, perhaps the jones' won't ride the train from that Tract.
But it is retail a center, and people work at retail centers and last I checked there are people who use DART to get to work.
Whether or not YOU would use it, based on your parking cost comparison is irrelevant; because there is always someone who will use the bus, train etc.
I'm not talking about retail workers commuting *to* this development- their income level may not allow them the luxury of driving. I'm talking about hypothetical residents in a mid/high rise development on the site. Anyone who could afford to live in that neighborhood (or any transit-oriented development in DFW, really) can afford a car, so transit needs to be faster or more reliable to win over a significant number of users. If every transit trip (either DART or MATA) begins with a 15 min walk (maybe less if you're lucky enough to catch a bus or find a Bird Scooter nearby), that's a hard sell when driving to uptown/downtown via surface streets takes less time than it does to get to the station.
There's such a pathetically small number of people in Dallas who 1) have the income required to live in urban-style developments and 2) are willing to accept the tradeoffs of going car-free/transit-first for their mobility needs. Until that changes, developing this tract of land is going to generate additional car trips no matter what, and new residential is gonna dump a lot more cars on the road than building retail outlets that are closer than the ones Uptown Residents are already driving to today.
If the neighborhood is successful in stopping this plan, that land will just sit vacant until they realize the arrogance of trying to dictate what a developer can and can't build. TC has enough money to carry the property taxes until housing demand hits a point where they can't not develop it, but by then the people whining will have long-since been priced out of the area and the houses will be next up to get bulldozed and replaced with high-rises anyway. Pyrric victory for them...
Matt777 wrote:TNWE wrote:Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Third, people use DART to get the shopping center nearby and the retail on the other side of Haskell already... There's Whataburger workers crossing the street all the time .. seriously.
You're right though, perhaps the jones' won't ride the train from that Tract.
But it is retail a center, and people work at retail centers and last I checked there are people who use DART to get to work.
Whether or not YOU would use it, based on your parking cost comparison is irrelevant; because there is always someone who will use the bus, train etc.
I'm not talking about retail workers commuting *to* this development- their income level may not allow them the luxury of driving. I'm talking about hypothetical residents in a mid/high rise development on the site. Anyone who could afford to live in that neighborhood (or any transit-oriented development in DFW, really) can afford a car, so transit needs to be faster or more reliable to win over a significant number of users. If every transit trip (either DART or MATA) begins with a 15 min walk (maybe less if you're lucky enough to catch a bus or find a Bird Scooter nearby), that's a hard sell when driving to uptown/downtown via surface streets takes less time than it does to get to the station.
There's such a pathetically small number of people in Dallas who 1) have the income required to live in urban-style developments and 2) are willing to accept the tradeoffs of going car-free/transit-first for their mobility needs. Until that changes, developing this tract of land is going to generate additional car trips no matter what, and new residential is gonna dump a lot more cars on the road than building retail outlets that are closer than the ones Uptown Residents are already driving to today.
If the neighborhood is successful in stopping this plan, that land will just sit vacant until they realize the arrogance of trying to dictate what a developer can and can't build. TC has enough money to carry the property taxes until housing demand hits a point where they can't not develop it, but by then the people whining will have long-since been priced out of the area and the houses will be next up to get bulldozed and replaced with high-rises anyway. Pyrric victory for them...
I was involved in the initial stages against the fight against Trammell Crow and Sam's. I was at that meeting outside the church. Most of these people own their homes and are not going to be priced out or going anywhere. They are firmly planted, some for decades, some for multiple generations, and they are invested in and care about their neighborhoods, Dallas as a whole, and our future. We need more of them and less of Trammell Crow.
TNWE wrote:NIMBYs are NIMBYs, whether they live in central Dallas or Collin county. The urban ones are worse because they fancy themselves to be noble defenders of democracy, when in reality they're far more self-interested and greedy than the ones in Plano they turn their noses up at.
Cbdallas wrote:If they would just put 8 stories of apartments above all of this I would be ok. I just don't understand why that would not be feasible for that area with Cityplace and Uptown right there. I said the same thing with Turtle Creek Village why did they not build it up with living mixed into the retail.
lakewoodhobo wrote:We're basically stuck with this project for the next 50 years, so at this point I hope that at least we get Target and Walmart to move here from their existing locations so those places can become the mixed-use development most of us want to see.
cowboyeagle05 wrote:lakewoodhobo wrote:We're basically stuck with this project for the next 50 years, so at this point I hope that at least we get Target and Walmart to move here from their existing locations so those places can become the mixed-use development most of us want to see.
Are we though? I am unclear if they have the needed approvals to actually build this thing. The Sam's Club got killed because of big box rezoning that was deemed done without proper approval/notification to the neighborhood. Does Trammel Crow have what they need to make this happen or do they need new approvals from the city?
As I understand they still need some changes to get this built.
cowboyeagle05 wrote:lakewoodhobo wrote:We're basically stuck with this project for the next 50 years, so at this point I hope that at least we get Target and Walmart to move here from their existing locations so those places can become the mixed-use development most of us want to see.
Are we though? I am unclear if they have the needed approvals to actually build this thing. The Sam's Club got killed because of big box rezoning that was deemed done without proper approval/notification to the neighborhood. Does Trammel Crow have what they need to make this happen or do they need new approvals from the city?
As I understand they still need some changes to get this built.
Tnexster wrote:I'm not sure I understand why the developer would not want to maximize the potential of a property like this rather than just settle for a basic strip model design.
Hannibal Lecter wrote:Stretching out a development over years increases the risks by an order of magnitude.
Just ask the original developers behind One Main Place, One Dallas Centre, BOA Tower, Fountain Place and (ironically) Cityplace how well their second towers worked out.
TNWE wrote:Hannibal Lecter wrote:Stretching out a development over years increases the risks by an order of magnitude.
Just ask the original developers behind One Main Place, One Dallas Centre, BOA Tower, Fountain Place and (ironically) Cityplace how well their second towers worked out.
Exactly. I know real estate development as a business is generally very optimistic about everything, but greater dallas is littered with half-finished developments (See: The Olympic- Opening 2016...no, wait, The Drever- Opening 2017...no 2018...now 2019, we Promise!)
The restaurant pad sites and modest retail nearest to 75 is a low-risk usage of this land, without entirely precluding larger scale development during the next cycle. As things stand now (rising oil prices, interest rates, general economic uncertainty from protectionist tariffs, etc), it is not the best time to start on a blockbuster development.
As I recall, the Rustic and Happiest Hour were both built fully expecting to be torn down/relocated when the time is right to put high-rise developments on that land. Both have more than paid for themselves in the few years they've been open- I have no doubt a chick fil a would have a similar return, and generate a lot more property and sales tax revenue than an abandoned, half-built tower.
TNWE wrote:The restaurant pad sites and modest retail nearest to 75 is a low-risk usage of this land, without entirely precluding larger scale development during the next cycle. As things stand now (rising oil prices, interest rates, general economic uncertainty from protectionist tariffs, etc), it is not the best time to start on a blockbuster development.
As I recall, the Rustic and Happiest Hour were both built fully expecting to be torn down/relocated when the time is right to put high-rise developments on that land. Both have more than paid for themselves in the few years they've been open- I have no doubt a chick fil a would have a similar return, and generate a lot more property and sales tax revenue than an abandoned, half-built tower.
Tivo_Kenevil wrote:You guys are way off the mark.
The plan was for this to be A big Box. There's never been a plan to redevelop it in a couple of years. It's always been planned for retail..This will be here for decades. Quit trying to sell false hope.
they are building now is what the market currently demands, and, in 5-10 years,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests