Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Man OLC has some sway to it I guess. This building looks really nice and would be a great addition to our skyline. I can't even get curbs put in on my block and they can stop a high rise. Must be nice!

Lol. Priorities.

So is the OLC a bit different version of a homeowners association with a candy company as a silent partner? Just kidding, sort of.

policy wonkas

Our competitor second tier cities like Miami or Chicago (i.e. not NY or SF) are announcing new high rises seemingly every week (despite the headlines out of Chicago, the urban core continues to grow.). The post-COVID landscape of the US is shifting and Dallas should be doing everything it can to take advantage of the potential tailwind. Letting concerned citizens halt new high rises is just shooting ourselves in the foot

R1070 wrote:

Cbdallas wrote:Based on that angle the OLC has no reason to exist. Developers should be able to go start directly with the city to get approval and build and speed up the process instead of start at a committee and waste time trying to please them by lowering building heights and traffic concerns and what plants and trees to plant.

The only reason I could see OLC existing is to push developers to design their buildings in a more forward thinking way to increase urbanity and pedestrian friendly development in the area. Other than that, let the city handle it.

So you want them to have an agenda instead of be a reflection of what the city, aka not just a few online back pocket city planners, would like to push into fruition. I love urbanity, walkable communities etc, and would like to see this project approved, but the attacks on the OLC are misplaced blame. The OLC is a scapegoat here. The idea that the OLC is a waste of time and an extra hoop is hard to argue cause the reality is if the issues aren't argued at the OLC level they are likely to argue just as long in the city council chambers by council members that have no stake in the Oak Lawn committees jurisdiction. I would prefer Oak Lawn to be able to submit its opinion in some form over letting a south Dallas council member push either a suburban ideal delusion or an urbanism manifesto. I think what we are all upset about here is that the OLC doesn't always agree with our vision for Dallas and that's just a reality we are all gonna have to swallow. That won't change just cause the OLC were to be removed that's a problem that happens from the council, planning commission, and city staff trying to apply their education with citizen comments into a unified recommendation. Abolish the OLC if that's even possible and what are you left with city staffers making the same judgments many of you complain about on other threads with council members from far-off districts making judgments that, lets face it are based in their own districts' issues and not Oak Lawns.

I want this project myself, and I have lived in Oak Lawn and have now for five years, which is a microscopic time in the grand scheme of the area's history so I agree the OLC could be improved, but it's not the issue here. Pushing for its dissolution wont get projects like this approved.

I’m so sick of hearing about residential development of any height in the city having an impact on traffic but then allowing 1 story shops of any kind to make it feel like a small town… Preston Center, Lovers and the Tollway, Knox and even Highland Park Village are traffic shit shows. Drive around any residential tower and try to even compare it. Think about residential with shops below and maybe additional parking so it’s never a problem and then think about the pipe dreams some of these NIMBYS have forced on everyone. They’re literally making it worse for themselves!! Ever tried to park at Hudson House on Lovers at lunch or diner and then had to park on the red residential street behind it that’s too narrow for the 2 way traffic and overflow street parking?!
It’s the stupidest argument ever. People are either blind or just stupid…. Just literally think for a second about it !!! Omg…. It drives me insane!!!

And my frustration with OLC is that they don’t do more to educate those folks. It comes off as them enabling it running these developers through the wringer.

I actually disagree that a local neighborhood has special needs that City Plan commission members or the City Council wouldn't understand. If they do, they aren't building height, parking, FAR ratios, and other things the OLC committee covers. And Dallas already has a bad and relatively conservative/suburban/restrictive city planning commission. So the OLC is completely unnecessary.

Why does the OLC still exist? And who’s responsible for the horrible design of Total Wine, the Starbucks back-ups and CVS? Planners? Architects? Developers? And can’t the Carlisle on the Creek folks continue on with trying to get Council approval regardless of the OLC?
Everything seems very backwards in this process to me. All those people moved and the building demolished. But the land could end up sitting empty? Just like so many other spots?

I curious about that too. Can't the developer just ignore the OLC since they don't have permit power? I get they can pressure the council, but from what I can tell they have no actual power to stop a development is that correct? My guess is the OLC is able to wield significant power of their council members.

CTroyMathis wrote:So is the OLC a bit different version of a homeowners association with a candy company as a silent partner? Just kidding, sort of.

I45Tex wrote:policy wonkas

Haha, underrated post I45Tex

Wrong development thread

The latest proposal shows that the building has been reduced 30 ft. From 390 ft to 360 ft.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XOOwsG ... Wh4Xh/view

Let’s see if OLC gives its blessing or if they will run this one off too.

Nice building and a great addition to this area. What is it with OLC and height?

Tnexster wrote:Nice building and a great addition to this area. What is it with OLC and height?

I have never understood this but it seems they don't want urban density I have no idea why. They need to be abolished and let Dallas grow up!

Tnexster wrote:Nice building and a great addition to this area. What is it with OLC and height?

The OLC has turned into a NIMBY focused group. Dallas doesn't need one more hurdle to face for developers anymore. It's become another Los Angeles type city that thwarts any kind of development. There are high rise towers in the surrounding neighborhoods, yet this group seems to block most towers in their area. It's time to disband this group.

I second this

FAA approved this request last week, so we will see what happens next.
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... 830&row=14

Same builder as the project going up next door?

OLC is run by a clique of NIMBYs looking out for their own self-interests. They need to be disbanded by the city ASAP.

RodB wrote:FAA approved this request last week, so we will see what happens next.
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... 830&row=14

Good to see, thanks RodB

Why so long for construction to start in September of 2025?
Do they have to demolish buildings?

Financing is really bad right now, construction costs are terrible too (government spending on infrastructure is keeping these costs high). We may be looking at a building drought over the next 1-5 years (no one has any certainty, but general consensus is at least one year). I think a lot of rezoning will occur during the meantime, but unless major tax incentives are present...it's going to be hard to get a project off the ground.

dzh wrote:Financing is really bad right now, construction costs are terrible too (government spending on infrastructure is keeping these costs high). We may be looking at a building drought over the next 1-5 years (no one has any certainty, but general consensus is at least one year). I think a lot of rezoning will occur during the meantime, but unless major tax incentives are present...it's going to be hard to get a project off the ground.

I agree. Some of the larger developers may have the ability to secure more favorable financing, but the smaller players will have a tough time moving forward. Some may sell off property to help pay off debt they already have on the books.

Even the larger developers are putting things on hold from what I understand. Goldman Sachs and the new Bank of America building barely received financing to start from what I understand.

Financing is no problem here in Tampa Bay. Mixed-use, office, apartment and condo high-rise buildings starting almost every other week.

I'm not familiar with the Tampa market, and I'm not saying you'e wrong...but I am very surprised to hear that considering where interest rates and constructions costs currently are. Most projects you see just starting to get off the ground in Dallas were either financing secured a year or two ago, or massive down payment.

A lot of people in the financial industry are "long Miami" leading to significant superheating of property valuations there, according to some articles, and looking around for relative real estate growth deals, as they always are, they seem to be going "long on Central Florida" cities too, by comparison (rational or not) to the price appreciation in Miami. It doesn't hurt that a significant number of financial firms and investors are relocating to South Florida, creating a speculative feedback loop (or a mini bubble if you will). Unfortunately for the greedy there are no simple ways for an investor to go "short" Florida.

But I in turn am very surprised to see you write that trophy class AA office buildings that are respectively 48% and 100% preleased (Miyama's Parkside to Bank of America, and Hunt's GS block) are just barely construction-loanworthy, nevermind investable.

Obviously building has slowed somewhat due to high interest rates, but the Eastside in Richardson group just bulldozed an industrial zone that was still occupied to extend their apartment units, and I have seen little to believe that building has slowed dramatically generally north of 635. Projects are still progressing and new projects still coming out of the ground.

So IMO there is something specific about Dallas that is slowing projects - either risky projects that have poor backing or groups that seem to be incompetent at construction scheduling (HEB), or the City Council or permitting process or something, but it's more specific to Dallas than not. I was just in Houston a few weeks ago. There were plenty of stuff going on there too.

I'm also using Dallas a proxy where demand is able to be met - Los Angeles is embarrassing compared to Dallas, at least since the summer.