Cityplace East: ACS/Xerox redevelopment

[lakewoodhobo]

I wonder if, now that Sam's Club is willing to operate smaller stores like the one on Lower Greenville, they are still interested in this site with a much smaller square footage. Also, it would be interesting if Walmart or WM Neighborhood Market takes one of the other sites so that it's still a massive WM shopping center but technically not a big box (like Timbercreek which has both WM and Sam's). I have no doubt that the companies previously interested in the small pad sites like Chick-fil-a are still interested.

Of course, if Walmart abandoned their store on Hall St to move here it would open that land for an urban mixed-use development. Would that be a reasonable trade-off?

[Tivo_Kenevil]

Anyone know how the neighborhood association is responding to this

[Warrior2015]

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.

What's wrong with these idiots ? Do they realize this is prime real estate right here ?!! This isn't Prosper or Allen. Geesh

[Tivo_Kenevil]

All about gross margins. They think they can get a fat check from potential suburban department stores. Right now they own a land where they pay taxes and nothing else. That's a money waster.

I think this may be short term.. who knows maybe theyre trying to recoup
their up front cost from the demolition and turn a small profit to offset the taxes.

Another year that passes is another year that they lose money. Theyve been kicked in the nuts with lawsuit. So they're desperately trying to get something up; Neighborhood be damned.

However, I would expect taxes to raise substantially here if De la Vega gets their way. IDK I'd be interested to see the financials for this. But turning a profit should be easy here.


I wish nothing but the worst for this project.

[dallaz]

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

[ContriveDallasite]

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

They are sitting on a property nearly as large as West Village when it started and they keep peddling this horse shit that would fit in McKinney. What gives?

[hjkll]

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.

[TNWE]

What's wrong with these idiots ? Do they realize this is prime real estate right here ?!! This isn't Prosper or Allen. Geesh

"Prime Real estate?" Get a grip...

It's on the wrong side of 75, DART isn't a close or easy walk, it's surrounded by primarily single-family and low-density apts (with a couple of the cheap stick-construction "luxury" complexes thrown in). Nothing about the site is particularly desirable other than the mass of open land. It is a car-dependent tract, no matter what gets built there. Might as well use if for car-dependent retail.

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. And for those capable of thinking beyond "Suburb bad, tower good"- wouldn't you agree that it's better if someone takes surface streets to a chick-fil-a a mile away as opposed to getting on 75 to go to one 3-4 miles away?

[ContriveDallasite]

Nobody is arguing with the fact that Dallas is a car dependent city. Sure, this plot of land sits next to a highway. But, it is also a mile away from the CBD and has a site layout with nearly 60% surface parking and is a walk away from the only subway station in Texas.

It seems like a no-brainer to throw a multistory parking garage connect it to a Sams Club/Big-Box like the one on Northwest HW (Timber Creek). But there is no creativity in this proposal or any attempt at pursuing a mixed-use allocation.

[Tivo_Kenevil]

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.

Oh stop it. No body in Dallas is clamoring for more chic fil a/in n outs..

Why live in Central Dallas if you want ubiquitous drive-thrus everywhere? I don't see a reason why they can't make the development more urban.

There's literally a mixed use development literally right next to this tract.

TC wants to cater to the suburban commuters not the neighborhood. That's what it's about.

The neighborhood doesn't want this. The people who live the closet to the land; have previously stated they don't like the direction or vision of the development. This is not a forum thing.

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.

East Dallas Neighborhood Assoc. Has posted on FB that they're looking into this development.

Hopefully they can put pressure on TC to change their vision.

[Kelley USA]

Maybe it's the art of negotiation... Perhaps TC is pushing this design knowing there will be push-back, so they'll "make" small concessions to give the appearance of being a good neighbor and one that's willing to listen to the commmunity now. But in the end they'll build exactly what they intended to build. Didn't TC also give us the atrocious Alexan apartment complex on the Katy Trail near the waterfall?

[DBadger]

Just a shot in the dark here; would there be a possibility to have an exit Staircase or escalator from city place to the east side of 75? It's technically under 75. I would think that would be a game changer for this whole side.

[cowboyeagle05]

I think Dallas has proven we can build car driven mixed-use developments easily that are walkable. Legacy anyone.

Something like Legacy West retail stretch with parking garages and residential is very car-oriented while also trying to be dense and walkable. I could tear it apart on its truism to urbanism but the reality is I would prefer the Legacy version to this thing Trammel Crow plans to build here. Hell, I would prefer the Park Lane development as well. That's a huge big box stack of retail that's more walkable than this and has some integrated almost suburban restaurant space.

Mind you I realize the values of both those mentioned markets with jobs and existing retail demand but if you read what Trammel Crow is trying to sell here is that they want to sell to big boxes and drive-thrus. All of which can be better incorporated into a denser urban walkable development. They want to instead throw up the cheap tilt wall stuff and move on with their check in hand sure I get it but you can not tell me that they can't do better. That the market can not or does not desire something better than another suburban shopping center is a crock.

[Tucy]

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.

[ContriveDallasite]

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.

JPMorgan Asset Management

[TNWE]

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.

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).

It's the paradox of being near transit and close to the urban core "as the crow flies." Sure, you may be "close," but if you having to walk more than 5 minutes or take a connecting bus to get where you're going, you might as well hop in the car. DART passes aren't that much less than monthly parking downtown, and traffic is less of a consideration as compared to say Plano. You're stuck with the cost of living markup because it's "Urban" and "close to transit," without the benefits of being able to go car-free and save on gas, registration, maintenance, etc.

[Tivo_Kenevil]

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).

Oh boy... Where do I even start.

First a 10 -15 min walk is not a lot. In your hypothetical example, where this tract is Barcelona-esque, I would bet there would be people who would walk even if it were 100 degrees outside. People do that now in Downtown...in real Life.

Also Dallas averages less than 22 days of 100 degree days in a year...but I digress.

Secondly, there's scooters and bikes everywhere now. What is holding anyone from riding one in your hypothetical world? 1.5 mile ride is shortened to 5 min.

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.

Given that the only Subway in Texas is nearby, that neighborhood doesn't want this development, and the adjacent lot is thinking mixed use.. why put this here?

Make no mistake about it, the city would love for uptown to cross over the east side of 75. These tracts adjacent to the highway really have the opportunity to help make that more of a reality.

This development is half assed and quite frankly a missed opportunity for the city.

[TNWE]

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]

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.

[Warrior2015]

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...

Actually walkability and people biking are up significantly in the urban core. People are slightly driving less and the people taking transit is kind of the same. You have to think and build long term. Yeah most people would still probably drive for most things, but if the city would develop and continue to evolve into a more walkable city, one day all of this is going to pay off. Its not going to go from majority auto dependent to wlakable overnight, but that dosent mean keep building dumb crap like this in the core of the city that's just retarded.

[TNWE]

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.

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.

[DPatel304]

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.

That's because, I feel, the urban/dense development is the only sustainable way to grow and move forward. Until I see something that proves otherwise, I will continue to advocate more density, more walkability, and more public transportation.

It's not simply because of the fact that I simply don't like suburban development, it's because, I feel, it is detrimental to the future success of our region.

[The_Overdog]

Pretty sure the ones in the suburbs fancy themselves to be noble defenders of Democracy (Agenda 21!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) more than the urban ones. But NIMBYs typically don't want to build anything (it's not Build something sensible in my backyard), so not sure it applies here.

[Cbdallas]

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.

[cowboyeagle05]

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.

Honestly, I think the simplest answer to that is developers don't want the complexity. Mixed Use and or dense projects like what many of us want require lots of agreements and other partners etc. Throwing up a shopping center is easy money and not every project a developer does is a landmark show stopper. Some are just solid investments that will be a sure thing and return a check that they can reinvest in a project they are more invested in. Developers portfolios are full of smaller projects or simple projects where they just turn a simple profit. Trammel Crow here has no desire to make this site a landmark project for their portfolio of shiny glass towers of hotels, commercial office, restaurant and residential space. While DeLaVega who owns the corner site that is surrounded by Trammel Crow is looking to prove they can pull together a large dense and complex project. The West Village is being developeed by a developer that that project is their trophy so they focus a lot of energy on it.

This site is a challenge of priorities. Trammel Crow feels its not a priority site for anything significant and others feel differently.

[lakewoodhobo]

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.

[DBadger]

These types of projects are the new version of a revenue producing 'parking lot'. Make money while you own the land. unfortunately with a parking lot, you can redevelop quickly. With a project like this, 30-40 years.

[cowboyeagle05]

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.

[Tivo_Kenevil]

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.

Per Steve brown in the article the current zoning allows it.

"
Last year, Crow reached a settlement that reverted the site to its original zoning, which would allow the current shopping center plan.

"

[lakewoodhobo]

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.

I thought this new proposal was allowed by right, but I need to re-read the story. Guessing it depends on whether the lawsuit resulted in removing only the big-box component or restarting the zoning process from scratch.

EDIT: Steve Brown wrote that "Last year, Crow reached a settlement that reverted the site to its original zoning, which would allow the current shopping center plan."

[Tnexster]

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.

[Tucy]

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.

Perhaps this design does maximize the potential for the developer.

[cowboyeagle05]

Well it maximizes the potential for this one developer's vision which is obviously not much. For this developer to them maximizing means throwing up the shopping center and moving on with their check. Doesn't mean that's the only way A developer can maximize the land just that this one has no desire to spend more effort here than previously announced on a bigger development. Some developers just don't see the value in stretching development out across years while all the moving parts get going when they have other projects they would like to focus their energy on.

[Hannibal Lecter]

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]

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.

[Warrior2015]

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.

I love happiest hour. Hope it lasts a long time. I wouldn't want it to leave

[DPatel304]

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.

Excellent point. I think we have all been extremely fortunate that DFW has boomed the way it has, so our expectations are at an all time high.

Yes, this development is disappointing, but if this is what the market is currently demanding, then so be it. Like you said, it's very possible that this development will simply be temporary and a place holder for something much more grand during the next cycle, and I'm totally okay with that. Dallas still has a lot going for it, even if we get the occasional development that isn't an all out win. We've been in a booming market for sometime now, so it's possible we are due for a slow-down in the near future, and I'm sure all of us would prefer to proceed cautiously, rather than shoot for the stars and end up building more than we can support.

[Tivo_Kenevil]

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.

The neighborhood wants better urban design not suburban drive thrus. The form
Is the problem not the fact it's retail.

The only hope is if they try a new design but that's a long shot given the architect they chose does strip malls for a living.

[Matt777]

The city council and planning commission should be 100% fired for letting this happen right next to a subway station worth hundreds of millions of taxpayer investment. The day this easy money atrocity breaks ground, a stack of boxes should be left outside their offices to pack their things. They have had 20 years to correctly zone the areas around DART stations and are either unwilling or incapable. We need change!

[DPatel304]

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.

I didn't mean to sell false hope. I just believe that what they are building now is what the market currently demands, and, in 5-10 years, I'm hoping that the market will demand something more urban/dense. But, you're right, there is no evidence that this will be re-developed in a decade, I'm just hoping the land will become so valuable that it is inevitable.

[The_Overdog]

they are building now is what the market currently demands, and, in 5-10 years,

People are right to be mad because this is not what the market is demanding to be built next to US75 until maybe once you pass Allen. Sure some of this stuff that is already there isn't yet being torn down. But no new is being built at this scale.

[lakewoodhobo]

Not entirely sure what this is about, but an LLC associated with De La Vega Capital (The Central) initiated and paid for a hearing to eliminate zoning restrictions on nonresidential uses in a very large swath of Cityplace East and West. Sounds like a technicality of some sort.

It's on page 307 of the CPC docket for this week: https://dallascityhall.com/government/m ... Docket.pdf

REQUEST: A City Plan Commission authorized hearing to determine proper zoning on property zoned Subarea C-1 within Subdistrict C; Subareas D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4, and D-5 within Subdistrict D; and Subdistricts E, E1, E2, F, G, H, H1 of Planned Development District No. 305, Cityplace; with consideration being given to amending the allowed square footage for nonresidential uses.

SUMMARY: The purpose of this authorized hearing is to eliminate the existing restrictions on the maximum allowable floor area for all nonresidential uses combined. The maximum floor area allowed is proposed to be regulated only by the floor area ratio (FAR) established for each subdistrict or subarea. Due to the limited number of items to be considered, an
interested party, Urban Smart Growth LP, initiated and paid for the authorized hearing.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the amendments.