Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

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

User avatar
citygeek
Posts: 26
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 13:44
Location: DFW-Tampa Bay

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

Postby citygeek » 22 Jul 2017 19:09

Cheap cheap cheap. Typical Lincoln Properties. A barely-glorified version of the suburban junk they built in the 80's, 90's. What a waste of an important location.

User avatar
Dragon_Lady
Posts: 4
Joined: 18 Oct 2016 22:54

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

Postby Dragon_Lady » 24 Jul 2017 20:27

Ditto.

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

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

Postby joshua.dodd » 31 Jul 2017 16:10

I drove by today. I honestly like it. I don't know why. I'm not exactly a big fan of the glass box. But I like this glass box. I don't know why, though, but I do.

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

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

Postby maconahey » 03 Aug 2017 18:45

From this afternoon
Image Image

User avatar
fractal
Posts: 3
Joined: 30 Apr 2017 16:32

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

Postby fractal » 03 Aug 2017 21:09

Do I hate it? No. Do I like it? Eh?? Is it basic, background, filler architecture? You betcha. Does it compete with, or subtract from the myerson (as was the intent)? Not even a little. But on such a prominent corner? Next to KWP? Eeeeehhhh...

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

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

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 04 Aug 2017 09:06

Dare I say it reminds me of Fort Worth...

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 » 04 Aug 2017 09:59

cowboyeagle05 wrote:Dare I say it reminds me of Fort Worth...


^^^ HAHA! Totally.

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

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

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 04 Aug 2017 10:11

Let me be clear I don't hate Fort Worth or its skyline just photos reminded of some of the things in Fort Worth. I will go on the record though that I prefer Downtown Dallas any day over Downtown Fort Worth. ;)

User avatar
mdg109
Posts: 62
Joined: 31 Oct 2016 17:10

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

Postby mdg109 » 04 Aug 2017 12:23

I'm not sure if I'm remembering correctly, but is there supposed to be a restaurant on the street level?

User avatar
vman
Posts: 42
Joined: 24 Oct 2016 07:44

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

Postby vman » 04 Aug 2017 12:24

I'm not blown away by it, but I'm reserving final judgment until the parking garage is covered in glass panels (it is going to be covered..right?) and the base is completed.

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

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

Postby joshua.dodd » 04 Aug 2017 13:42

Yes, the garage will be completely enclosed by glass.

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

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

Postby joshua.dodd » 04 Aug 2017 13:44

cowboyeagle05 wrote:Let me be clear I don't hate Fort Worth or its skyline just photos reminded of some of the things in Fort Worth. I will go on the record though that I prefer Downtown Dallas any day over Downtown Fort Worth. ;)


I like Downtown Dallas because of its height. But I like Downtown Fort Worth more because of its architecture. Fort Worth did what Dallas didn't. They preserved their historical brick and mortar buildings, including their art deco gems. Dallas on the other hand...well, there's a reason why there are so many parking lots. The city didn't even try to save Theater Row.

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

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

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 04 Aug 2017 17:26

joshua.dodd wrote:
cowboyeagle05 wrote:Let me be clear I don't hate Fort Worth or its skyline just photos reminded of some of the things in Fort Worth. I will go on the record though that I prefer Downtown Dallas any day over Downtown Fort Worth. ;)


I like Downtown Dallas because of its height. But I like Downtown Fort Worth more because of its architecture. Fort Worth did what Dallas didn't. They preserved their historical brick and mortar buildings, including their art deco gems. Dallas on the other hand...well, there's a reason why there are so many parking lots. The city didn't even try to save Theater Row.


Revisionist history if I have ever heard it. At least slanted if not revisionist. Dallas had more economic activity so its development community tore down more buildings because there was a more vibrant economy demanding more office space. Fort Worth didn't have as much interest the way Dallas did so more buildings were left standing without the economic demand to replace them with taller modern office towers. Dallas has always been the more modern cousin trying to keep up with the Jones. Fort Worth is happy just the way they are as a slower moving city. I prefer Dallas despite my desire for more historical structures. Keep in mind the save history movement didn't occur in any city in any discernable way for another several decades. Sure there has always been that old lady saying save the clock tower but historical buildings weren't seen as truly valuable to more of the population until the last 20 years. Now there are federal financial incentives for saving old buildings. Saving Theater row in Dallas would have only happened if the land wasn't more valuable and movie theaters hadn't already condensed into the megaplexes they are now. Let's not frame Dallas development history only by current expectations and trends.

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

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

Postby joshua.dodd » 04 Aug 2017 21:25

There is some truth to that, in terms of economic demand, as the era of big oil Boom saw the growth of height in Dallas' skyline. However, this demand proved in the end to be a speculative flop. It led to the 1987 commercial real estate crash that absolutely ruined the city, which has now just recovered in this decade. The reason for the demolition of those buildings did have much to do with supply and demand, as you said. Very true. However, there were many other factors at play. For instance, the growth of suburbia and the contraction of freeways such as Central Expressway saw businesses and industry relocate to other areas. As an inevitable result, vacancies in downtown went up and demand decreased over time, to the point that it did lead to the demolition of many old brick and mortar buildings because it cost more to maintain them than to just demolish them. I would say that had a huge factor, and that is not revisionism. I assure you, I'm no cultural Marxist by any context lol

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

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

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 07 Aug 2017 11:09

joshua.dodd wrote:There is some truth to that, in terms of economic demand, as the era of big oil Boom saw the growth of height in Dallas' skyline. However, this demand proved in the end to be a speculative flop. It led to the 1987 commercial real estate crash that absolutely ruined the city, which has now just recovered in this decade. The reason for the demolition of those buildings did have much to do with supply and demand, as you said. Very true. However, there were many other factors at play. For instance, the growth of suburbia and the contraction of freeways such as Central Expressway saw businesses and industry relocate to other areas. As an inevitable result, vacancies in downtown went up and demand decreased over time, to the point that it did lead to the demolition of many old brick and mortar buildings because it cost more to maintain them than to just demolish them. I would say that had a huge factor, and that is not revisionism. I assure you, I'm no cultural Marxist by any context lol


I can agree to some of your points and thanks for lengthening your statement out to include all the rest of the information you were working with. Now I get where your opinion came from. I still disagree on the final summarization though. The 80's boom turned out to be a bust for sure but it was driven by market forces that made things worth tearing down in justification for office construction that eventually never materialized. Fort Worth never had that value and you can see that as a blessing for them but the reality is Dallas has had more interest for decades and that interest has shown itself time and time again. Our tear downs were because it made more sense economically in many ways to tear down for parking or new development, reduce maintenance costs of an empty historic building etc. The new part of the equation came much later when historical buildings became an attractive model for some business interests and developers. Not all as we see today but the wave of the public supporting preservation allowed Fort Worth to seek new value in what they had while Dallas fights with itself over civic structural programs to save what we have left.

User avatar
Hannibal Lecter
Posts: 120
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 19:57

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

Postby Hannibal Lecter » 07 Aug 2017 12:59

joshua.dodd wrote:It led to the 1987 commercial real estate crash that absolutely ruined the city, which has now just recovered in this decade.


The primary cause of the nation-wide real estate crash of the mid-80's was Congress retroactively removing the preferential tax treatment of real estate. Dallas fell quicker and further than most because we had just spiked more than most, but this was an event beyond local control. I spent almost 10 years overseeing and liquidating properties coast-to-coast for the RTC, FDIC, FSLIC and some of the nation's largest banks that were built only due to the tax benefits. I actually handled some that had negative appraised values, because the cost of scraping the improvements would exceed the value of the land.

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

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

Postby tamtagon » 07 Aug 2017 18:25

Hannibal Lecter wrote:
joshua.dodd wrote:It led to the 1987 commercial real estate crash that absolutely ruined the city, which has now just recovered in this decade.


The primary cause of the nation-wide real estate crash of the mid-80's was Congress retroactively removing the preferential tax treatment of real estate. Dallas fell quicker and further than most because we had just spiked more than most, but this was an event beyond local control.


Dallas fell quicker and further than most because some of those bank-and-land deal makers were breaking the law. The state's response to local fraudulent number crunching and partnerships helped lessened the most recent banking collapse recession; the high price of oil lessened the recession more.

Tear-downs is a problem in all sunbelt cities.

User avatar
Pike5370
Posts: 5
Joined: 03 Feb 2017 09:04

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

Postby Pike5370 » 08 Aug 2017 13:54

tamtagon wrote:Tear-downs is a problem in all sunbelt cities.


Fascinating comment. Please elaborate further as to why you think this is unique to all sunbelt cities, whether this problem ever occurs in northern regions and, if not, why you think that is the case.

User avatar
LBK2013
Posts: 13
Joined: 01 May 2017 13:23

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

Postby LBK2013 » 08 Aug 2017 14:45

Pike5370 wrote:
tamtagon wrote:Tear-downs is a problem in all sunbelt cities.


Fascinating comment. Please elaborate further as to why you think this is unique to all sunbelt cities, whether this problem ever occurs in northern regions and, if not, why you think that is the case.


When did they say it was a unique problem. They just it was a problem to Sunbelt cities and I think that is true. Of course it happens in the North. Penn Station in NYC being the best example I can think of off the top of my head. Then you have cities like Detroit that have suffered so much blight they don't have any choice but to tear down some of the structures.

User avatar
Pike5370
Posts: 5
Joined: 03 Feb 2017 09:04

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

Postby Pike5370 » 08 Aug 2017 15:54

LBK2013 wrote:
Pike5370 wrote:
tamtagon wrote:Tear-downs is a problem in all sunbelt cities.


Fascinating comment. Please elaborate further as to why you think this is unique to all sunbelt cities, whether this problem ever occurs in northern regions and, if not, why you think that is the case.


When did they say it was a unique problem. They just it was a problem to Sunbelt cities and I think that is true. Of course it happens in the North. Penn Station in NYC being the best example I can think of off the top of my head. Then you have cities like Detroit that have suffered so much blight they don't have any choice but to tear down some of the structures.


Not sure who "they" is, as I was referring to tamtagon's comment "Tear-downs is a problem in all sunbelt cities." If he did not mean it was a problem unique to only or mostly "sunbelt cities" I assume he would have simply written "Tear-downs is a problem in all/most/many cities."

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

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

Postby tamtagon » 08 Aug 2017 21:53

Pike5370 wrote:
tamtagon wrote:Tear-downs is a problem in all sunbelt cities.


Fascinating comment. Please elaborate further as to why you think this is unique to all sunbelt cities, whether this problem ever occurs in northern regions and, if not, why you think that is the case.


I think it happens everywhere to some degree.

I said sunbelt cities because I'm much more familiar with them. Atlanta, Houston, Dallas... San Antonio, Austin, Nashville, Charlotte, they're very similar, have responded to cars and air conditioning similarly. Cultural influences are shared quite a bit. In many ways, Spanish language culture is the biggest difference between Texas cities and the rest of 'The South.'

Sunbelt cities are coming of age on the same timeline, too.

That's pretty much why I said sunbelt cities instead of most cities.

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

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

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 09 Aug 2017 08:36

Sunbelt cities have defined different growth patterns and that includes its tear down culture of historic buildings to make way for new development was distinctly different than large northern cities. This doesn't mean other non-sunbelt cities didn't tear down buildings its just means they tended to handle it differently and or not in the way that Sunbelt cities tended to in the past. We discuss these very topics in city planning school and it is documented in books. Tamtagon is right so let's move back to the topic of this thread unless someone is interested in a teardown debate forum thread?

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

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

Postby kingpin » 12 Aug 2017 16:14

8/12/17
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 » 30 Aug 2017 10:51

From this morning
Image

User avatar
mwaskow
Posts: 16
Joined: 24 Mar 2017 14:47

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

Postby mwaskow » 30 Aug 2017 16:21

This building is actually starting to look a LOT better with that glass up on the parking garage. You really can't even tell the bottom half is parking. I think it will turn out to be a decent looking building, not great.

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

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

Postby R1070 » 30 Aug 2017 18:12

I agree. Decent infill in a space that I never expected to see developed. Perhaps it will have some interesting LED lighting and a cool restaurant.

User avatar
texasstar
Posts: 54
Joined: 18 Oct 2016 22:39

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

Postby texasstar » 30 Aug 2017 21:27

We've always know they were going to cover those parking floors. That is why I've always wondered about the venom directed at this nice in-fill tower. The renderings always suggested it would look just fine.

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 Aug 2017 23:47

texasstar wrote:We've always know they were going to cover those parking floors. That is why I've always wondered about the venom directed at this nice in-fill tower. The renderings always suggested it would look just fine.


It's ok. But it looks straight out of 1988 tbh.

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

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

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 31 Aug 2017 08:57

It is still boring architecture but it's here so get used to it. Keep in mind it's got plenty of star players around it. I'll just toss it to the idea we should not have a million shining stars. Infill is nice. We could have gotten a drive up a bank or a one story restaurant. Or a CVS...

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

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

Postby tamtagon » 31 Aug 2017 10:17

I'll let it go eventually, but the site deserved better.


AAEAAQAAAAAAAAIXAAAAJDBiZWI5ZjdmLWI1YzMtNGIxZC1hNDRlLWExZWQ1ZWFjMmM1Mg.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

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

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

Postby Redblock » 07 Sep 2017 16:19

The tower crane was raken down today.

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

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

Postby maconahey » 22 Sep 2017 17:52

Image

Image

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

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

Postby kingpin » 24 Sep 2017 16:33

9/24/17

ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr

ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr

ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr

User avatar
WestTexas86
Posts: 9
Joined: 26 Mar 2017 19:28

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

Postby WestTexas86 » 26 Sep 2017 23:38

tamtagon wrote:I'll let it go eventually, but the site deserved better.


AAEAAQAAAAAAAAIXAAAAJDBiZWI5ZjdmLWI1YzMtNGIxZC1hNDRlLWExZWQ1ZWFjMmM1Mg.jpg

agree 100%

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

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

Postby joshua.dodd » 27 Sep 2017 00:10

I like it. But it will be demolished for something else in forty years. That's how this stuff tends to work.

User avatar
dallaz
Posts: 40
Joined: 26 Oct 2016 14:50

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

Postby dallaz » 27 Sep 2017 08:30

Y'all to me...the building isn't that bad. Yes, it could have been better but it is NOT terrible. It's simply a nice infill building. Hopefully, the ground level will make up for its unspectacular design.

I know how we wish every building could have a striking design but that's not reality. Like I said previously, let's hope the ground level makes up for it...

lakewoodhobo
Posts: 256
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:49
Location: Elmwood, Oak Cliff

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

Postby lakewoodhobo » 27 Sep 2017 09:35

kingpin wrote:9/24/17
ImageUntitled by Around My City, on Flickr


Well at least it reflects Museum Tower, so from a certain angle it gives the illusion of a decent building.

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

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

Postby eburress » 27 Sep 2017 09:51

lakewoodhobo wrote:Well at least it reflects Museum Tower, so from a certain angle it gives the illusion of a decent building.


I don't think it's an awful building, but still, that cracked me up! haha


User avatar
dallaz
Posts: 40
Joined: 26 Oct 2016 14:50

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

Postby dallaz » 25 Oct 2017 16:37

The building looks a whole lot better since the cladding is just about complete. Nice infill building...

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

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

Postby Tivo_Kenevil » 25 Oct 2017 16:43

Are those LEDs...cause you know how we feel about LEDs in this town...

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

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

Postby joshua.dodd » 14 Nov 2017 21:32

This building turned out nicely.

Image

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

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

Postby kingpin » 14 Nov 2017 22:51

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

User avatar
texasstar
Posts: 54
Joined: 18 Oct 2016 22:39

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

Postby texasstar » 15 Nov 2017 07:49

Good looking tower! Who knew?

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

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

Postby Tivo_Kenevil » 15 Nov 2017 09:40

It's okay. Nothing great. I wanna see it at night w/ LED lighting.

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

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

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 15 Nov 2017 10:00

Looks like a dictionary just taking up space in the skyline without anything interesting to show for it.


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

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

Postby ContriveDallasite » 24 Nov 2017 02:47

I would say the fins definitely help this building a bit.

Not every building in a city is going to be a show-stopper. Still looks better than the Richards-Group building.

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

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

Postby R1070 » 24 Nov 2017 16:38

It looks taller going West on Woodall Rodgers.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rasec33 and 4 guests

Login