Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Addison wrote:

itsjrd1964 wrote:

Tucy wrote:
Started January 1, 2023

Thanks. I didn't know at the time I asked. They've since updated our computers at work for the correct tax posting. Amazingly, I haven't had any guests (yet!) that have pissed/moaned/etc. about the new rate.

If the vast majority or most of your customers are on business trips, they wouldn't give a flying f*** what the tax rate is, since they're not paying for the reservation...

rono3849 wrote:Business travelers don't check taxes. They check the rates. When you go into a market like New York, San Francisco, & Austin, you are charged exorbitant rates just to stay in those cities. They know the taxes will be high because they are used to it. If a company needs to send people into those markets, they know they are paying for the cost of doing business in that city. Dallas is a hot market business wise, so people will pay the rates and move on. They just want to get to the airport and catch their flight home.

Tnexster wrote:I love these photos, mainly just because of what appears to be 50B in new towers, infrastructure improvments and developments that we will never see. The only things I could see coming out of this is a new convention center and maybe a new hotel tower.

Tucy wrote:

Tnexster wrote:I love these photos, mainly just because of what appears to be 50B in new towers, infrastructure improvments and developments that we will never see. The only things I could see coming out of this is a new convention center and maybe a new hotel tower.

and new hotel tower likely only comes if it's heavily subsidized or outright owned by the City of Dallas (like the Omni). This is just one of the fun games the City of Dallas plays.

1. We need to build a convention hotel to get the full benefit of our convention facilities --> City overspends to build Omni convention hotel.
2. Now that we have the hotel next to the convention center, we still have trouble attracting conventions because there's nowhere else nearby to eat --> City builds a building to subsidize restaurant operations.
3. We need to expand the convention center so that it's big enough to handle the groups the hotels and restaurants can attract --> City overspends to build flashy new convention center (incidentally, further from the rest of downtown and its hotel stock).
4. Coming soon after the new convention center: Now that we have a big flashy, overpriced convention center, we need more adjacent hotel space in order to book the size and quantity of gatherings the new center is built for --> City builds (or at the very least heavily subsidizes) another convention hotel. They'll probably also discover a lack of sufficient restaurants in the area and subsidize more development. and on it goes.

mhainli wrote:

Tucy wrote:

Tnexster wrote:I love these photos, mainly just because of what appears to be 50B in new towers, infrastructure improvments and developments that we will never see. The only things I could see coming out of this is a new convention center and maybe a new hotel tower.

and new hotel tower likely only comes if it's heavily subsidized or outright owned by the City of Dallas (like the Omni). This is just one of the fun games the City of Dallas plays.

1. We need to build a convention hotel to get the full benefit of our convention facilities --> City overspends to build Omni convention hotel.
2. Now that we have the hotel next to the convention center, we still have trouble attracting conventions because there's nowhere else nearby to eat --> City builds a building to subsidize restaurant operations.
3. We need to expand the convention center so that it's big enough to handle the groups the hotels and restaurants can attract --> City overspends to build flashy new convention center (incidentally, further from the rest of downtown and its hotel stock).
4. Coming soon after the new convention center: Now that we have a big flashy, overpriced convention center, we need more adjacent hotel space in order to book the size and quantity of gatherings the new center is built for --> City builds (or at the very least heavily subsidizes) another convention hotel. They'll probably also discover a lack of sufficient restaurants in the area and subsidize more development. and on it goes.

Certainly agree that the city had been very reactionary as stated above. Can’t argue with any of those points. However, this multi-level study as it relates to the large scale rebuild of the convention center is long overdue - no more band aids. It is too bad this study wasn’t done BEFORE the Omni (and restaurants in front of it) were built. We’d likely have a future CC location that connects better with downtown near the current site or a brand new location..

dallaz wrote:The PowerPoint presentation

https://dallascityhall.com/government/c ... 072023.pdf

IcedCowboyCoffee wrote:

dallaz wrote:The PowerPoint presentation

https://dallascityhall.com/government/c ... 072023.pdf

Thanks for the link dallaz.
One takeaway seems to be they're choosing to keep Union station as the multimodal hub, hence the skybridge investment, rather than redirecting everything to the convention center station or the hypothetical HSR station. But I'm curious where the convention center DART station will ultimately land then. The detailed layout plan clearly marks the DART station at the ground level of the building itself (and there is still the ghostly impression of a station outside the building), while another drawing suggests the DART station outside. Guess we'll see, but I suppose "DART Station" likely simply means a DART bus station.
multi1.JPG
multi2.JPG

Addison wrote:If anything, the biggest mistake the city made was not building a new convention center sooner. It would have been a much more cost-effective project 10-15 years ago when interest rates and construction costs were lower.

Hannibal Lecter wrote:

Addison wrote:If anything, the biggest mistake the city made was not building a new convention center sooner. It would have been a much more cost-effective project 10-15 years ago when interest rates and construction costs were lower.

Then you would have incurred 10-15 years of operating losses, maintenance costs, etc...

rono3849 wrote:Plans as impactful as this must be adapted to the needs and situation presented to the developers. I think this project doesn't need to fall prey to the selfish interests that befall so many American cities that eventually bring about a collapse in all planning. Chicago has continually fought projects that eventually abandoned the city for other venues. George Lucas was going to build a wonderful museum and due to the NIMBYs, he pulled the entire project and it's now being built in Los Angeles in their museum district near USC. Chicago is about to lose the Bears to the suburbs as they build a new stadium on the spot that formerly was a horse racing tact.

Addison wrote:The Chicago Bears moving to Arlington Heights is not a done deal yet, FWIW...

rono3849 wrote:

Addison wrote:The Chicago Bears moving to Arlington Heights is not a done deal yet, FWIW...

It's all but done. The Bears have told the city of Chicago that they plan to leave. Mayor Lightfoot is publicly upset, so I fully expect them to leave Soldier Field, which they've already upgraded once.

tamtagon wrote:Looks like the HSR station made the fly through

IcedCowboyCoffee wrote:I believe there are restrictions on how much of a highway can be covered before ventilation equipment has to be installed. I guess leaving that gap open is a cost-saving measure to avoid having to do that.

Tucy wrote:In some situations, the need to add ventilation also requires the acquisition of further right-of-way to house the ventilation infrastructure, further escalating costs.

NFPA [National Fire Protection Association] 502 does not mandate that mechanical ventilation be provided in tunnels less than 1000 m (3280 ft.) long, but does require an engineering analysis be performed. Historically, for short tunnels, common practice is that they are not mechanically ventilated. However, societal awareness about the serious nature of fires in road tunnels, coupled with the development of NFPA 502, has led to a need to demonstrate quantitatively whether mechanical ventilation is needed. NFPA 502 states that emergency ventilation shall not be required in tunnels less than 3280 feet in length, where it can be shown by an engineering analysis that the level of safety provided by a mechanical ventilation system is equaled or exceeded by enhancing the means of egress or the use of natural ventilation.

dallaz wrote:Dallas to scale back plans for new convention center


https://youtu.be/QvjEEpXSBPk

Tucy wrote:

dallaz wrote:Dallas to scale back plans for new convention center


https://youtu.be/QvjEEpXSBPk

Hmmmn... Fair Park loses 24% of its funding. Convention Center loses 6.67% Seems fair.

IcedCowboyCoffee wrote:An exclusive look at what we'll inevitably get:

Tucy wrote:Hmmmn... Fair Park loses 24% of its funding. Convention Center loses 6.67% Seems fair.

BigD5349 wrote:SMH. I don’t know what to say. Dallas was built by banking execs that saw the growth of Dallas as good for business. Now, it’s real estate developers and a weak city government where the only goal is to slap up more cookie cutter apartment buildings that increase the tax base - for now.

It’s that, and then this propensity for sanitized, boring urban areas like the Arts District. This fetish with “family friendly” - every downtown pocket park has to be suitable for 3-8 year old children. Where is the quality-of-life development for adults who live here? Austin and Houston are running laps around Dallas.

It blows my mind how Dallas refuses to invest in anything that could make Dallas shine, give us all a reason to be here… like Fair Park should be. I remember reading a story from the original article 40 years ago about moving FP institutions to the Arts District. Even then they said the city needs to invest in FP. Nothing changes. Trinity River development is the same.

Dallas is losing Texas’ tall building race.

Both Houston and Austin now top Big D in terms of skyscrapers, according to a new report by Texas Real Estate Source.

Houston’s high-rises total 30,498 feet tall when combined. In Austin, tall buildings add up to almost 24,000 feet in height.

Dallas stacks up to only about 22,000 combined feet of skyscrapers.

Cbdallas wrote:That article is so flawed. We have limitations here in height due to FAA restrictions due to being under Love Field flight path. Neither Austin or Houston have that. Also we have a much more urban experience surrounding downtown with much more density and more to come. I love a tall building but I would not want to sacrifice overall density for just a small looped downtown with supertalls that fall off into low rise neighborhoods as you leave it. To get more tall buildings in Dallas we need to convince more businesses and people to move to the center of our city, that is the real challenge not height.

The Dallas City Council is slated to consider awarding a contract on Wednesday for project management services for the nearly $3 billion expansion of the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center Dallas and a proposed deck park over Interstate 30.

Inspire Dallas LLC, an entity tied to Lewisville-based real estate development firm Matthews Southwest, appears to be the frontrunner for a $65 million, six-year professional services contract, according to supporting documents posted with a city agenda on Monday.

Seven proposals were received for project management services for the implementation of the first component of a master plan that includes the expansion of the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center Dallas and proposed deck park and the demolition of the existing convention center, according to the city.

The facade of the new convention center will remain the same, Fleming said, but the footprint has been modified due to requests by the Texas Department of Transportation to use a flyover bridge for Union Pacific Railroad construction and staging space for dirt and equipment for construction on Interstate 30.

Fleming said new footprint is also meant to avoid conflict with the creation of a high-speed rail system near the convention center. In January, the Dallas Transportation and Infrastructure Committee discussed the potential for an elevated walkway, or "people mover," that would connect the already proposed high-speed rail station in the Cedars to the convention center and the Eddie Bernice Johnson Union Station, which is being reimagined as a multi-modal transportation hub, KERA reported.

Rosa Fleming, the city’s convention and event services director, said Monday that plans for the Texas Department of Transportation to widen nearby I-30 have led to the city planning to shift the new convention center north to free up a parking lot for state workers to use.

R1070 wrote:It's definitely an improvement in general, but... I hope that lot is repurposed for something.