Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Downtown Progress

User avatar
willyk
Posts: 229
Joined: 18 Oct 2016 20:20

Downtown Progress

Postby willyk » 19 Oct 2016 22:52


User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 176
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby dukemeredith » 17 Nov 2016 20:55

I don't know if there's a better thread to ask this question, but was anyone able to make it to the Downtown Residents Meeting at the Tower Club this evening?

Regrettably, I got caught up at work...

User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 176
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby dukemeredith » 03 Jan 2017 21:16

Buffalo Becomes First Major City to Eliminate Parking Minimums

http://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/01/03/b ... ing-rules/

Why can't we do this?

User avatar
Hannibal Lecter
Posts: 62
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 19:57

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby Hannibal Lecter » 04 Jan 2017 12:30

Buffalo hasn't been a "major city" in a long time. Population is somewhere between Garland and Plano.

So why would we want a city that's been losing population for 70 years as a role model?

User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 176
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby dukemeredith » 04 Jan 2017 12:52

Fair point about Buffalo.

But the article mentioned Miami and Denver as examples of big cities that have also implemented FBCs. I'd say those are certainly two cities worthy of attention.

User avatar
tanzoak
Posts: 134
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 19:15

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby tanzoak » 04 Jan 2017 13:30

The move to eliminate parking minimums has been picking up steam, and in a lot of places that mirror Dallas's population growth and high level of auto use. Seattle and Portland eliminated them for non single-family areas, and Oakland eliminated them downtown and drastically reduced elsewhere (like 0.5:1 parking:unit ratio). Even Austin and Houston have eliminated them in their downtowns.

Both supporters and detractors should keep in mind, though, that a reduction or even repeal would be unlikely to produce significant changes in the near term unless you're currently seeing developers building at only the minimum. Which I don't think is the case in Dallas, though figuring out project details is so difficult it's tough to tell.

User avatar
tanzoak
Posts: 134
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 19:15

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby tanzoak » 04 Jan 2017 13:48

I think a lot of times when people hear "reduce/eliminate parking minimums" they think that it means imposing parking maximums or otherwise requiring a reduction in parking. It doesn't. It merely allows the market provide how much parking people are willing to pay for rather than the government mandating an arbitary amount (and as a transportation engineer, I cannot stress how divorced from rigorous analysis they are).

It means, for instance, that if a developer is building a development in Uptown with a bunch of 1BRs geared towards young, childless, single people, maybe they think they only need to build 1.25 spaces per unit instead of 1.5 (or whatever it is). Maybe they're wrong, but if they are, then their project will do poorly and other developers will take note not to try that for a while. But if they're right, then future developers can see that and can reduce the cost of those projects, which is both good for them and good for the broader public, as they don't then pass those unneeded costs onto everyone.

User avatar
gshelton91
Posts: 43
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 11:01

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby gshelton91 » 05 Jan 2017 10:51

And from a retail point of view i would rather pay to park once in a parking garage then park for free at one store and have to move my car to shop at the next store down the street.

User avatar
tamtagon
Site Admin
Posts: 479
Joined: 16 Oct 2016 12:04

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby tamtagon » 05 Jan 2017 12:16

Sometimes when thinking about the downtown area residential inventory increase, and considering how closely the long time big construction and rental property owners monitor and analyze 'the cycles' of development, I'm starting to think the big boys intentionally misread 'the cycle' of (especially) residential supply and demand. Sometimes I think downtown area would be better served by a building surge putting inventory 30% over demand ---- simply because the extra would be absorbed, but maybe not a quickly as the power-players have foreseen; maintaining 'a cycle' ceiling baseline that's actually too low, deters too many outsider from impacting the market, optimizes revenue beyond a reasonable profit and cedes control to the same handful of players.

For years we've been talking about how quickly the CBD residential population would reach 10,000, and look at how quickly Uptown has grown... but really, the population could be so much more already, but the supply just isn't there.

User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 176
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby dukemeredith » 05 Jan 2017 12:29

tamtagon wrote:Sometimes when thinking about the downtown area residential inventory increase, and considering how closely the long time big construction and rental property owners monitor and analyze 'the cycles' of development, I'm starting to think the big boys intentionally misread 'the cycle' of (especially) residential supply and demand. Sometimes I think downtown area would be better served by a building surge putting inventory 30% over demand ---- simply because the extra would be absorbed, but maybe not a quickly as the power-players have foreseen; maintaining 'a cycle' ceiling baseline that's actually too low, deters too many outsider from impacting the market, optimizes revenue beyond a reasonable profit and cedes control to the same handful of players.

For years we've been talking about how quickly the CBD residential population would reach 10,000, and look at how quickly Uptown has grown... but really, the population could be so much more already, but the supply just isn't there.


When I find myself with similar frustrating thoughts, I have to remind myself what's on the horizon for CBD:
- Statler Residences
- Drever apartments
- AMLI apartment tower near Fountain Place
- High rise apartments across from Trammell Crow Center
- High rise apartments at Flora and Olive in the Arts District

And then I look at Google Earth and see all the empty spaces and car parks...
- Field and San Jacinto
- Leonard and San Jacinto (Spire Realty?)
- Elm and Pearl
- Wood and Ervay
- Cadiz and Ervay
- Wood and Field
- Jackson and Griffin
- Main and Lamar

I'm sure there are more :cry:

User avatar
tanzoak
Posts: 134
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 19:15

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby tanzoak » 05 Jan 2017 14:42

Who sets the "cycle ceiling"? Are you just talking about developers and (especially) lenders being leery after a certain (too low) level, or is there some sort of city policy that restricts it beyond a certain point?

User avatar
willyk
Posts: 229
Joined: 18 Oct 2016 20:20

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby willyk » 05 Jan 2017 21:26

dukemeredith wrote:
tamtagon wrote:Sometimes when thinking about the downtown area residential inventory increase, and considering how closely the long time big construction and rental property owners monitor and analyze 'the cycles' of development, I'm starting to think the big boys intentionally misread 'the cycle' of (especially) residential supply and demand. Sometimes I think downtown area would be better served by a building surge putting inventory 30% over demand ---- simply because the extra would be absorbed, but maybe not a quickly as the power-players have foreseen; maintaining 'a cycle' ceiling baseline that's actually too low, deters too many outsider from impacting the market, optimizes revenue beyond a reasonable profit and cedes control to the same handful of players.

For years we've been talking about how quickly the CBD residential population would reach 10,000, and look at how quickly Uptown has grown... but really, the population could be so much more already, but the supply just isn't there.


When I find myself with similar frustrating thoughts, I have to remind myself what's on the horizon for CBD:
- Statler Residences
- Drever apartments
- AMLI apartment tower near Fountain Place
- High rise apartments across from Trammell Crow Center
- High rise apartments at Flora and Olive in the Arts District

And then I look at Google Earth and see all the empty spaces and car parks...
- Field and San Jacinto
- Leonard and San Jacinto (Spire Realty?)
- Elm and Pearl
- Wood and Ervay
- Cadiz and Ervay
- Wood and Field
- Jackson and Griffin
- Main and Lamar

I'm sure there are more :cry:


Add:
Butler Brothers
Corrigan
Tower Pertroleum
Mayflower

All good stuff, but like everyone else I feel like Downtown is perpetually on the cusp.

Uptown started with some entrepreneurial developers taking chances in State Thomas. That same breed is taking chances again in West Dallas, East Ross, Henderson and the Design District. I like all of those plays, but Downtown is a better bet than any of them because once it catches on, the gaping price differential between Uptown and Downtown will narrow and deliver significant appreciation to the Downtown investments.

That opportunity for appreciation is unique in the Dallas market. But it's going to take new construction to fill the dead spaces between Uptown and all of the recently renovated properties. Chicken meet egg. Let's hope we still have some hungry developers looking to eat them both.

User avatar
DPatel304
Posts: 231
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby DPatel304 » 06 Jan 2017 02:52

willyk wrote:All good stuff, but like everyone else I feel like Downtown is perpetually on the cusp.

Uptown started with some entrepreneurial developers taking chances in State Thomas. That same breed is taking chances again in West Dallas, East Ross, Henderson and the Design District. I like all of those plays, but Downtown is a better bet than any of them because once it catches on, the gaping price differential between Uptown and Downtown will narrow and deliver significant appreciation to the Downtown investments.


What you're saying is definitely true, but I suppose the advantage of the surrounding neighborhoods is all the small-scale development that is happening in addition to the large scale development. If a developer were to build something large on Ross Ave, chances are, there would be numerous small town-home communities that pop up nearby to help support the larger development and keep the momentum going. That's just not something you're likely to see in Downtown though. Anyone taking a chance and building something big Downtown will just have to hope that other people also take as big of a chance to build something else big nearby to keep the momentum going.

User avatar
muncien
Posts: 223
Joined: 25 Oct 2016 08:46
Location: Las Colinas

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby muncien » 06 Jan 2017 10:35

I also think you have too many players (owners & developers) sitting on block size properties in the CBD waiting to cash in on some business wanting to build a big corporate tower. It's an 80's mindset that likely won't come to fruition. Unfortunately, the assessed land values are all screwed up in the CBD, and it makes it more convenient for such owners to shell out the property to parking operators and use the revenue to pay the minuscule taxes that are due.
The first thing that needs to happen is that the county assessors get their act together and assess the land for what it's real value is (near to that which it would buy/sell for).
Then, owners will be more willing to act on the property (poo or get off the pot) and allow alternate uses (mixed use/residential) to sprout up.
There'll still be plenty of land for corporate clientele, but I suspect that about 80% of what is available should go to other uses. Not to mention the fact that more residents will encourage more business... Everybody wins.

User avatar
tamtagon
Site Admin
Posts: 479
Joined: 16 Oct 2016 12:04

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby tamtagon » 06 Jan 2017 11:28

^Totally, especially with the major Ross Avenue bookends: Headington & Spire. Spire property especially is much more likely to land the big corporate tenant(s) in a 1,000,000 sq ft building if a lot of people are already living along/near the amenities portion of that development (that would connect the train station to the Arts District --- a pedestrian corridor that alone could support a great deal of Spire's non-office plans). The Headington corners being prime location for >1,000 room hotels, significant and unique entertainment venues.

User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 176
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby dukemeredith » 17 Jan 2017 14:26

Here's everyone's favorite intersection. Looks like some roadwork being done. Any thoughts?

Routine maintenance? Prepping the area for development?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
willyk
Posts: 229
Joined: 18 Oct 2016 20:20

Re: Downtown Progress

Postby willyk » 19 Apr 2017 02:36

This sounds like a big improvement in rents along Ross Ave--can anyone else confirm?

Rents in St. Paul Place average $10 per square foot less than those in the newest Uptown offices. The building is just over 80 percent leased, with major tenants including D Magazine, Crowe Horwath, Sendero Business Systems, MapR Technologies, Vault Aviation and UNICEF.

"It all comes down to having the vision what the space can be," Cook said.
St. Paul Place is just one of a handful of 1980s-era downtown towers that are being renovated. And it's one of several large redevelopments along Ross Avenue on downtown's north side.


https://www.dallasnews.com/business/real-estate/2017/04/18/tower-redo-bringing-business-dallas-ross-avenue


Return to “City Issues/News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Login