Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

User avatar
CTroyMathis
Site Admin
Posts: 113
Joined: 13 Oct 2016 19:51

Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby CTroyMathis » 19 Oct 2016 17:06

Placeholder post.

User avatar
CTroyMathis
Site Admin
Posts: 113
Joined: 13 Oct 2016 19:51

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby CTroyMathis » 19 Oct 2016 17:15

From today:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 23 Oct 2016 21:40

Is there any sign of glass being installed yet?

User avatar
maconahey
Posts: 129
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:07

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby maconahey » 25 Oct 2016 09:29

Image

User avatar
dallasbeatsaustin
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Oct 2016 21:44

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby dallasbeatsaustin » 25 Oct 2016 23:20

So, we are about halfway?

User avatar
ArtVandelay
Posts: 75
Joined: 01 Nov 2016 12:44

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby ArtVandelay » 01 Nov 2016 20:38

I don't get this one - 14 floors of parking and 10 floors of office space.

User avatar
maconahey
Posts: 129
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:07

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby maconahey » 17 Nov 2016 10:10

From the other day
Image
Image
Image

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 17 Nov 2016 11:34

Thanks for posting, still no glass.

User avatar
CTroyMathis
Site Admin
Posts: 113
Joined: 13 Oct 2016 19:51

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby CTroyMathis » 27 Dec 2016 17:13


Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 02 Jan 2017 12:28

That is an amazing amount of garage space. Still no glass.

User avatar
tamtagon
Site Admin
Posts: 779
Joined: 16 Oct 2016 12:04

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby tamtagon » 02 Jan 2017 13:03

Tnexster wrote:That is an amazing amount of garage space. Still no glass.


...wonder what it'll be in ten years. residential fleet vehicle overnite area.

User avatar
kingpin
Posts: 227
Joined: 14 Nov 2016 09:24

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby kingpin » 02 Jan 2017 13:09

1/2/17

ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr
ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr
ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr
ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr
ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr

User avatar
maconahey
Posts: 129
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:07

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby maconahey » 11 Jan 2017 09:02

Image

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 11 Jan 2017 09:49

So they have seven more floors?

User avatar
Redblock
Posts: 48
Joined: 24 Nov 2016 11:15

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Redblock » 23 Jan 2017 20:11

Tnexster wrote:That is an amazing amount of garage space. Still no glass.


GLASS!!! Yes, there is glass on the lowest office floor. It appears about 8 floor-high panes were mounted on the Woodall Rodgers side of the building in the last day or two.

User avatar
eburress
Posts: 161
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:13

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby eburress » 23 Jan 2017 20:54

Redblock wrote:
Tnexster wrote:That is an amazing amount of garage space. Still no glass.


GLASS!!! Yes, there is glass on the lowest office floor. It appears about 8 floor-high panes were mounted on the Woodall Rodgers side of the building in the last day or two.


Oooh, what's it look like?? Highly reflective, I hope! hahaha

User avatar
R1070
Posts: 280
Joined: 26 Oct 2016 21:00

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby R1070 » 23 Jan 2017 21:50

Perhaps the garage is so large because they anticipate revenue from the Arts District and Klyde Warren Park attendees looking for parking.

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 24 Jan 2017 14:16

Redblock wrote:
Tnexster wrote:That is an amazing amount of garage space. Still no glass.


GLASS!!! Yes, there is glass on the lowest office floor. It appears about 8 floor-high panes were mounted on the Woodall Rodgers side of the building in the last day or two.


FINALLY!! Can't wait to see what it looks like.

User avatar
maconahey
Posts: 129
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:07

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby maconahey » 24 Jan 2017 17:51

I'm sure it'll look much different without the overcast skies

Image

Image

User avatar
ContriveDallasite
Posts: 109
Joined: 27 Oct 2016 03:34
Location: München

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby ContriveDallasite » 25 Jan 2017 01:29

So they will be using a different glass for the garage portion of the tower?

User avatar
joshua.dodd
Posts: 248
Joined: 23 Oct 2016 01:11

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby joshua.dodd » 25 Jan 2017 02:58

Why is the garage portion of this building so big?

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 511
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 25 Jan 2017 09:10

joshua.dodd wrote:Why is the garage portion of this building so big?


Have you been to Dallas before? They want good parking ratios to stay above the competition for tenants. I do wonder about public parking since it has been declared a international emergency of global proportions by the Klyde Warren management.

User avatar
maconahey
Posts: 129
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:07

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby maconahey » 25 Jan 2017 09:11

From this morning
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
eburress
Posts: 161
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:13

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby eburress » 25 Jan 2017 09:45

Thanks for posting! That glass color is pretty close to what the renderings suggested...maybe a tad lighter. It looks good! :)

User avatar
joshua.dodd
Posts: 248
Joined: 23 Oct 2016 01:11

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby joshua.dodd » 25 Jan 2017 10:29

cowboyeagle05 wrote:
joshua.dodd wrote:Why is the garage portion of this building so big?


Have you been to Dallas before? They want good parking ratios to stay above the competition for tenants. I do wonder about public parking since it has been declared a international emergency of global proportions by the Klyde Warren management.


Unless they are planning on opening their parking garage to public use, it makes no practical sense to have such a large parking garage for just the building tenants. A four story parking garage would serve their tenants adequately. And yes, I live and am from Dallas. Family has been in Dallas since 1843.

User avatar
Tucy
Posts: 219
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 12:50

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tucy » 25 Jan 2017 12:19

joshua.dodd wrote:
cowboyeagle05 wrote:
joshua.dodd wrote:Why is the garage portion of this building so big?


Have you been to Dallas before? They want good parking ratios to stay above the competition for tenants. I do wonder about public parking since it has been declared a international emergency of global proportions by the Klyde Warren management.


Unless they are planning on opening their parking garage to public use, it makes no practical sense to have such a large parking garage for just the building tenants. A four story parking garage would serve their tenants adequately. And yes, I live and am from Dallas. Family has been in Dallas since 1843.


The current commercial office space parking standard is running at about 3 spaces for every 1,000 square feet. The parking being built in 1900 Pearl allows them to offer exactly that ratio of parking. The parking portion of the building is so large for the same reason that massive parking structures are being added to the Trammel Crow Center, Fountain Place, Bank of America Plaza and Harwood Center.

User avatar
Dmkflyer
Posts: 56
Joined: 23 Oct 2016 13:28

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Dmkflyer » 25 Jan 2017 14:36

Also, I don't think they went underground for any portion of parking.

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 30 Jan 2017 11:34

After seeing this over the weekend the glass looks very dark. Maybe it will change when more glass gets placed but for the moment it appears to be more grey than I was expecting.

User avatar
ContriveDallasite
Posts: 109
Joined: 27 Oct 2016 03:34
Location: München

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby ContriveDallasite » 30 Jan 2017 14:30

Dmkflyer wrote:Also, I don't think they went underground for any portion of parking.


I am not sure if it is just me, but it seems like such a loss that we need to dedicate such a ridiculous amount of space to parking. Just from a visual standpoint it seems pathetic that at such an incredibly prime location as this one, half of a building whose view is directly on KWP is dedicated to car parking...

edit: It almost seems as if as a city we need to ween people off the addiction of being able to park immediately in front of wherever it is that they need to go.

--> To elaborate even further. I lived and worked in downtown Dallas for 2 years which allowed me to analyze the trends of some of my coworkers. Who would drive 2 miles from their apartment in uptown, expect parking at directly at the lot by Acension coffee, drive to Chase Tower for work, drive to Monkey King Noodle for lunch, and then drive to Bishop Arts for dinner. It seems pathetic the amount of parking that a single resident in Dallas demands. The incredible amount of wasted space in this city is astounding.

User avatar
Tivo_Kenevil
Posts: 610
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 12:24

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tivo_Kenevil » 30 Jan 2017 16:06

ContriveDallasite wrote:
Dmkflyer wrote:Also, I don't think they went underground for any portion of parking.


I am not sure if it is just me, but it seems like such a loss that we need to dedicate such a ridiculous amount of space to parking. Just from a visual standpoint it seems pathetic that at such an incredibly prime location as this one, half of a building whose view is directly on KWP is dedicated to car parking...

edit: It almost seems as if as a city we need to ween people off the addiction of being able to park immediately in front of wherever it is that they need to go.

--> To elaborate even further. I lived and worked in downtown Dallas for 2 years which allowed me to analyze the trends of some of my coworkers. Who would drive 2 miles from their apartment in uptown, expect parking at directly at the lot by Acension coffee, drive to Chase Tower for work, drive to Monkey King Noodle for lunch, and then drive to Bishop Arts for dinner. It seems pathetic the amount of parking that a single resident in Dallas demands. The incredible amount of wasted space in this city is astounding.


Blame the city not the residents. Change the environment; change the habbits of people.

User avatar
R1070
Posts: 280
Joined: 26 Oct 2016 21:00

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby R1070 » 30 Jan 2017 18:51

Maybe the additional parking is for revenue from Arts District and Klyde Warren visitors. That could allow more people from the far out burbs to be able to drive in and spend money in Dallas if they have good parking options close by.

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 31 Jan 2017 09:49

ContriveDallasite wrote:edit: It almost seems as if as a city we need to ween people off the addiction of being able to park immediately in front of wherever it is that they need to go.


Before too long people will be able to drop themselves off in front of wherever they want to go and send the car to park on its own. How we get around is advancing very quickly and will alter transportation faster than most realize and probably not as one might expect.

DPatel304
Posts: 490
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby DPatel304 » 31 Jan 2017 09:58

R1070 wrote:Maybe the additional parking is for revenue from Arts District and Klyde Warren visitors. That could allow more people from the far out burbs to be able to drive in and spend money in Dallas if they have good parking options close by.


Isn't this mentality partly what lead to Downtown's decline. I realize there were many other factors that contributed to this, but having our urban core catering to the far out burbs by making massive freeways that cut through the city and ample parking was a big part of the problem that we are trying to remedy right now.

Since the garage is already built, I won't stress over it too much, but it's not that hard to park at West Village or the Quadrangle and take the trolley to KWP, or perhaps park at one of the DART park and ride stations, to the rail to Pearl/Arts District then walk to the park. Or park at many of the existing pay garages in Downtown.

User avatar
Thymant
Posts: 109
Joined: 25 Oct 2016 17:23

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Thymant » 31 Jan 2017 10:32

Why is it that everyone seems so shocked by a garage being added in the base. In Chicago either all or most new buildings have garages and even if they don't they usually have contracts with garages in other buildings because most people only ride the train for convenience and to save money. If someone can afford it the most preferred method of getting around in Chicago is by the car. In Chicago like here no one rides the train or buses to be "urban" or cool but rather to get around. That being said why would a developer go out of there way to finance a high rise costing millions without providing parking, because even though we may like it I doubt the tenants would.

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 31 Jan 2017 10:59

Thymant wrote:Why is it that everyone seems so shocked by a garage being added in the base. In Chicago either all or most new buildings have garages and even if they don't they usually have contracts with garages in other buildings because most people only ride the train for convenience and to save money. If someone can afford it the most preferred method of getting around in Chicago is by the car. In Chicago like here no one rides the train or buses to be "urban" or cool but rather to get around. That being said why would a developer go out of there way to finance a high rise costing millions without providing parking, because even though we may like it I doubt the tenants would.


I used to live near Chicago and observed the same thing. Dallas isn't doing anything that other large cities aren't doing. The parking garages in downtown Chicago are abundant and quite large and they have been for a very long time. There is just no way to get around the fact that buildings need garage space and there is also no way to build enough commuter options to get away from that. Most of the population in DFW lives far enough away from a train or a bus or trolley that is just isn't an option.

User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 225
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby dukemeredith » 31 Jan 2017 13:41

Tnexster wrote:
Thymant wrote:Why is it that everyone seems so shocked by a garage being added in the base. In Chicago either all or most new buildings have garages and even if they don't they usually have contracts with garages in other buildings because most people only ride the train for convenience and to save money. If someone can afford it the most preferred method of getting around in Chicago is by the car. In Chicago like here no one rides the train or buses to be "urban" or cool but rather to get around. That being said why would a developer go out of there way to finance a high rise costing millions without providing parking, because even though we may like it I doubt the tenants would.


I used to live near Chicago and observed the same thing. Dallas isn't doing anything that other large cities aren't doing. The parking garages in downtown Chicago are abundant and quite large and they have been for a very long time. There is just no way to get around the fact that buildings need garage space and there is also no way to build enough commuter options to get away from that. Most of the population in DFW lives far enough away from a train or a bus or trolley that is just isn't an option.



I live right next to the St. Paul rail station, and I still almost never ride (except to the State Fair).

Anywhere I want to go that isn't within walking distance is two or three stops away. But $5 each way for two people? That's the price of an Uber. Or I can drive and walk a few blocks. I have no economic incentive to ride the train.

DART should consider incentivizing urban riders to ditch the car by making short trips cheaper than other, more convenient alternatives. Until then, if it's outside of walking distance, why wouldn't I drive?

User avatar
muncien
Posts: 385
Joined: 25 Oct 2016 08:46
Location: Las Colinas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby muncien » 31 Jan 2017 14:17

Everything inside the loop, plus Victory, Deep Ellum, Cedars, and possibly City Place should be considered local streetcar and be either free or very reduced. Fares checks aren't done in these areas anyway, so it's really a non-functional change for DART. I doubt any revenue will be lost as it's extremely unlikely anybody is currently paying for such trips. It would boost ridership, reduce traffic/parking, and bring a little life to the streets though...

User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 225
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby dukemeredith » 31 Jan 2017 15:04

muncien wrote:Everything inside the loop, plus Victory, Deep Ellum, Cedars, and possibly City Place should be considered local streetcar and be either free or very reduced. Fares checks aren't done in these areas anyway, so it's really a non-functional change for DART. I doubt any revenue will be lost as it's extremely unlikely anybody is currently paying for such trips. It would boost ridership, reduce traffic/parking, and bring a little life to the streets though...



Wow, really? Even with that knowledge, I don't think rule-abiding folks like me would want to 'scam the system.'

User avatar
tanzoak
Posts: 297
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 19:15

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby tanzoak » 31 Jan 2017 21:45

Thymant wrote: In Chicago either all or most new buildings have garages and even if they don't they usually have contracts with garages in other buildings because most people only ride the train for convenience and to save money. If someone can afford it the most preferred method of getting around in Chicago is by the car. That being said why would a developer go out of there way to finance a high rise costing millions without providing parking, because even though we may like it I doubt the tenants would.


Tnexster wrote:I used to live near Chicago and observed the same thing. Dallas isn't doing anything that other large cities aren't doing. The parking garages in downtown Chicago are abundant and quite large and they have been for a very long time. There is just no way to get around the fact that buildings need garage space and there is also no way to build enough commuter options to get away from that.


You guys are missing a key issue: parking requirements.

I certainly agree that even without parking requirements, developers would still provide a lot of parking in Dallas buildings because of tenant demand. But I bet there'd be less. The precise 3.0/1000 ratio of 1900 Pearl screams "meeting zoning requirements." People don't bemoan the extreme amount of parking in these buildings to be hip, they do it because each additional floor that has to be dedicated to parking represents fewer people living and working in Dallas and contributing to the vitality and tax base of the city.

Chicago isn't a good example that large parking garages will continue to be built no matter what, btw. Yes, there are parking garages in the Loop, but a) they continue to be redeveloped (as opposed to built more of like at Fountain Place), and b) they serve like 5x more office space.

New office buildings have little to no parking: this one (http://chicago.curbed.com/2017/1/18/143 ... h-building) has only 150 spaces for 1.35mil sf of office (i.e. only 0.1/1000), for instance. And for residential, here's a project in a residential neighborhood 6 mi out that has only 29 spaces for 147 units (http://chicago.curbed.com/2017/1/30/144 ... n-sheridan).

User avatar
Jbarn
Posts: 30
Joined: 05 Nov 2016 18:58

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Jbarn » 01 Feb 2017 18:06

dukemeredith wrote:
Tnexster wrote:
Thymant wrote:Why is it that everyone seems so shocked by a garage being added in the base. In Chicago either all or most new buildings have garages and even if they don't they usually have contracts with garages in other buildings because most people only ride the train for convenience and to save money. If someone can afford it the most preferred method of getting around in Chicago is by the car. In Chicago like here no one rides the train or buses to be "urban" or cool but rather to get around. That being said why would a developer go out of there way to finance a high rise costing millions without providing parking, because even though we may like it I doubt the tenants would.


I used to live near Chicago and observed the same thing. Dallas isn't doing anything that other large cities aren't doing. The parking garages in downtown Chicago are abundant and quite large and they have been for a very long time. There is just no way to get around the fact that buildings need garage space and there is also no way to build enough commuter options to get away from that. Most of the population in DFW lives far enough away from a train or a bus or trolley that is just isn't an option.



I live right next to the St. Paul rail station, and I still almost never ride (except to the State Fair).

Anywhere I want to go that isn't within walking distance is two or three stops away. But $5 each way for two people? That's the price of an Uber. Or I can drive and walk a few blocks. I have no economic incentive to ride the train.

DART should consider incentivizing urban riders to ditch the car by making short trips cheaper than other, more convenient alternatives. Until then, if it's outside of walking distance, why wouldn't I drive?


That would be smart and make sense, so why would DART ever do that? That is totally contrary to their current way of thinking and operating. Our transit system is built to get suburban people into and out of the city as quickly as possible, and nothing more. Otherwise they would not be taking a decade to redo the bus system that the folks inside the city would be more likely to utilize. The whole DART board needs to be fired and replaced with folks that actually ride the system.

User avatar
Thymant
Posts: 109
Joined: 25 Oct 2016 17:23

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Thymant » 01 Feb 2017 21:18

You guys are missing a key issue: parking requirements.

I certainly agree that even without parking requirements, developers would still provide a lot of parking in Dallas buildings because of tenant demand. But I bet there'd be less. The precise 3.0/1000 ratio of 1900 Pearl screams "meeting zoning requirements." People don't bemoan the extreme amount of parking in these buildings to be hip, they do it because each additional floor that has to be dedicated to parking represents fewer people living and working in Dallas and contributing to the vitality and tax base of the city.

Chicago isn't a good example that large parking garages will continue to be built no matter what, btw. Yes, there are parking garages in the Loop, but a) they continue to be redeveloped (as opposed to built more of like at Fountain Place), and b) they serve like 5x more office space.

New office buildings have little to no parking: this one (http://chicago.curbed.com/2017/1/18/143 ... h-building) has only 150 spaces for 1.35mil sf of office (i.e. only 0.1/1000), for instance. And for residential, here's a project in a residential neighborhood 6 mi out that has only 29 spaces for 147 units (http://chicago.curbed.com/2017/1/30/144 ... n-sheridan).


I see what your saying but I used Chicago as an example simply to show that large urban areas exist with the presence of many parking garages and that this is not a true hindrance to urbanizing central Dallas (so long as the building still interacts with the street) and nothing more. Now in terms of zoning requirements I agree that there should be a much lower parking requirements, but Dallas still needs a couple of decades to really gain the same type of density that Chicago has which would warrant more people to utilize DART. Long story short this is not a bad urban design even with a higher parking ratio.

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 02 Feb 2017 15:31

Dallas' Lincoln Property shopping eateries to open with new Arts District tower

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/ ... j=77269651

User avatar
The_Overdog
Posts: 185
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 14:55

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby The_Overdog » 02 Feb 2017 15:43

In my opinion, most buildings in a downtown area are essentially 'opaque' and off limits once you are past the first floor (if you can even get that far) as a general member of the public, so as long as they have a decent street presence at the first floor, the rest can be office, residential, or parking, or factory, or even something unsavory like a jail and it makes no difference.

As long as the building constructed gets rid of ground-level parking lots and the city doesn't widen streets to accommodate cars, then people can drive if they wish and commercial buildings can build parking as high as they wish.

User avatar
maconahey
Posts: 129
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:07

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby maconahey » 03 Feb 2017 12:13

Image

User avatar
maconahey
Posts: 129
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:07

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby maconahey » 16 Feb 2017 08:40

Image
Image

Tnexster
Posts: 898
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Tnexster » 16 Feb 2017 14:31

Thanks for posting the update pics!

User avatar
CTroyMathis
Site Admin
Posts: 113
Joined: 13 Oct 2016 19:51

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby CTroyMathis » 17 Feb 2017 18:46

Thanks for the photos!

Another from yesterday:

Image


1900pearl-021617-1.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
joshua.dodd
Posts: 248
Joined: 23 Oct 2016 01:11

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby joshua.dodd » 17 Feb 2017 20:03

When are they going to start covering the garage portion with glass? That part of the tower is ugly as hell.

User avatar
Redblock
Posts: 48
Joined: 24 Nov 2016 11:15

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby Redblock » 18 Feb 2017 21:44

Does anyone still have a link to the renderings for this project?

User avatar
CTroyMathis
Site Admin
Posts: 113
Joined: 13 Oct 2016 19:51

Re: Arts District: 1900 Pearl (362 FT | 25 ST)

Postby CTroyMathis » 19 Feb 2017 08:49

Redblock wrote:Does anyone still have a link to the renderings for this project?

Building website: http://1900pearl.com


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DallasAg and 4 guests

Login