Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Does this put any pressure on the other property owners along Field St to announce something on their sites, in order to stay relevant and competitive?

Hopefully, the architecture will be less stucco and less hip/modern garbage for this site. The West End deserves old, traditional industrial-style architecture.

joshua.dodd wrote:Hopefully, the architecture will be less stucco and less hip/modern garbage for this site. The West End deserves old, traditional industrial-style architecture.

Need more buildings like this in the West End area.

http://mithun.com/project/weyerhaeuser- ... ccidental/

^^ That'd be pretty awesome! I'm hoping all the potential new development along Field/Griffin will motivate the city to do some sort of smart streets project(s) there.

I'd like to see Munger Avenue opened back up through this. The highway off-ramp ruins this property for what could be a fantastic pedestrian-heavy corridor between West End and the Museum. It's so popular right now, the massive parking podium garages sprouting multiple highrises, and that'll be great for this property; that'll be World Class for this property if the super-duper block of contiguous parking garage exists below street level with multiple highrises sprouting out of the ground and within small block street grid, giving pedestrians full criss-cross access thru the whole 6 acres.

Is there any reason Museum Way (and DART right of way) cannot lop-off part of North End Apartment flank the Science Museum, pass under the highway and thru the parking lot, transect this property and meet Griffin?

Check D magazine if you're interested in seeing the latest rendering from Woods for this project...

Wow, I didn’t expect to see a proposal this fast...

Tim Headington certainly seems to be the quiet kid with lots of acreage nearby and not showing any of his cards while the other guys flash these kinds of renderings around hoping to snag the big fish.

Dang, that's pretty awesome! I really hope that happens!

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/rea ... wn-dallas/

Another puff piece

Snagged the rendering before the paywall went up.

You can see the rendering includes the Dart D2 underground portal in front of the property.

Looks like a 25 story wall of glass.

I’ve been really looking at the renderings for a min now. Ummm I’m not too sure if I like it yet.

What about y’all?

It sure does look like 2010s Dallas, for better and for worse. Reminds me a lot of what's gone up in Legacy.

This rendering is particularly optimistic with already putting an additional high rise on the other side of the portal.

Wonder why the entire office space was not in one tower as a centerpiece? There’s no height restrictions there. It simply looks to crowded. What’s with all those podiums? It needs some useable green areas and space for pedestrians.

I know that KWP or another public-private partnership would have to do what I'm suggesting -- it's not in the scope of the site owners' pro forma -- but I think this site, however jumbled or too low or too high, is a far cry from how memorable it will be if the McKinney Avenue Trolley could continue straight from 1717 McKinney Avenue, have a trolley overpass, and come across into this site. In an analysis I did once, thinking I might send it to someone, I noticed McKinney dives 25' down a hill as it descends west from Akard.

Thanks to that plunge, if new MATA track can just be built on an elevated route at roughly the same hilltop ground level as Akard, I think those few adjacent property owners' opinions would be the bigger hurdle than actually jumping over Woodall Rodgers (even though it does rise going west from under Akard) itself would be. In my way of envisioning it, if you have a pedestrian deck shaded by a trolley-track deck above, and separate bicycle lane outriggers (i.e. the sidewalk continues down the hill farther until it can launch underneath the trolley structure) then it could one day form a logical endpoint for extensions of Klyde, and also make LoMac and Downtown part of the same exciting _signature_ urban Dallas walk. That is, one with a kind of natural mind's-eye beeline legibility and level of activity and architecture that no other promenade in the city has.

Then from here I would just dream of MATA continued right down Griffin to Founders Square. Wouldn't be so hard to meet the Oak Cliff/Union Station Dallas Streetcar then, like DART's desired "Central Link" wanted the two to do (but which made them both map-spaghetti routes, hard to remember without riders' rote memorization).

Seems about time Dallas gets a big relocation from the East coast... Into this billion dollar development.

Why such a modest height, for a project of this magnitude, at THIS location?

How about a more imposing design? Or lights that rival the Omni/BOA Plaza? Something that elicits a little more pride... something a little more striking... It's not bad, but it doesn't really look like the project is seizing the true potential of this massive, front row, blank canvas in the heart of downtown Dallas.

That said, I wouldn't mind if they went ahead with the current renderings. I'm tired of looking at that giant concrete sea, it might not be ideal but the design is at least somewhat interesting/refreshing. Plus great massing in an area devoid of any.

I want it built for the sake of them filling up those hideous parking lots, but the design is not world class or striking. It's actually a bit ugly to be honest. We need something GORGEOUS there.

This isn't anything "game-changing" or something that's going to "change the Dallas skyline". It's a nice infill project. Not too bold and not too boring. It's slightly underwhelming but I'm not opposed to seeing it built as-is. I would love to see more height for sure! It looks like all the buildings are in the 20 - 30ish story range?? It really just reminds of a larger Park District or The Union. And I'm assuming we'll see a number of changes to the design between now and groundbreaking.

Chris Sapphire wrote:I want it built for the sake of them filling up those hideous parking lots, but the design is not world class or striking. It's actually a bit ugly to be honest. We need something GORGEOUS there.

This is a by product of hiring HKS as your architect. Look at their portfolio. Not one single design that is striking... Maybe it's the developers in Dallas that like boring. Or maybe the local architects are just ass... Right now, I'm leaning towards the latter.

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:

Chris Sapphire wrote:I want it built for the sake of them filling up those hideous parking lots, but the design is not world class or striking. It's actually a bit ugly to be honest. We need something GORGEOUS there.

This is a by product of hiring HKS as your architect. Look at their portfolio. Not one single design that is striking... Maybe it's the developers in Dallas that like boring. Or maybe the local architects are just ass... Right now, I'm leaning towards the latter.

But at the end of the day it's the developers who sign off on these project. I think it has more to do with the developers than the architects. Developers should be demanding more in terms of bolder designs. Of course, the architects are probably always going to say "we can give you more, we can give you bolder, but the cost for your project goes up by $200 million"...

I think the dichotomy comes from developers remembering the 1980s, and the most of the people on this site not.

It's a lot easier to dream big when it's not your dollars on the line.

Keep in mind that the Hall building that just opened is built on a foundation poured 35 years ago.

Kelley USA wrote:

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:

Chris Sapphire wrote:I want it built for the sake of them filling up those hideous parking lots, but the design is not world class or striking. It's actually a bit ugly to be honest. We need something GORGEOUS there.

This is a by product of hiring HKS as your architect. Look at their portfolio. Not one single design that is striking... Maybe it's the developers in Dallas that like boring. Or maybe the local architects are just ass... Right now, I'm leaning towards the latter.

But at the end of the day it's the developers who sign off on these project. I think it has more to do with the developers than the architects. Developers should be demanding more in terms of bolder designs. Of course, the architects are probably always going to say "we can give you more, we can give you bolder, but the cost for your project goes up by $200 million"...

I would agree with you.. but the project is 1 billion dollars. You're telling me this is the best design for 1 Billy? Get outta town. Ass design.

Call me crazy, but I find 15-30 floors to be the sweet spot for CBD infill. The taller you go, the more imposing the structure is at ground level... not to mention all the non interactive pieces that come with additional loading docs and mechanical.
I know the supertalls provide all the eye candy that fills post cards and such, but we have plenty of those already. Let's get some people in the mix now.

So... maybe I missed it... Is the South Asian Museum officially dead?

Duda Paine was the design architect on the new Pioneer building in Irving, but HKS was the administrative architect-of-record on that project whose aesthetics are not assthetic

I45Tex wrote:Duda Paine was the design architect on the new Pioneer building in Irving, but HKS was the administrative architect-of-record on that project whose aesthetics are not assthetic

Duda Paine actually does great design work. The design on The Republic tower in Austin was great I thought. But this HKS project is a uninspiring to say the least...

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:

Kelley USA wrote:

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:
This is a by product of hiring HKS as your architect. Look at their portfolio. Not one single design that is striking... Maybe it's the developers in Dallas that like boring. Or maybe the local architects are just ass... Right now, I'm leaning towards the latter.

But at the end of the day it's the developers who sign off on these project. I think it has more to do with the developers than the architects. Developers should be demanding more in terms of bolder designs. Of course, the architects are probably always going to say "we can give you more, we can give you bolder, but the cost for your project goes up by $200 million"...

I would agree with you.. but the project is 1 billion dollars. You're telling me this is the best design for 1 Billy? Get outta town. Ass design.

Haha, yea, I do agree with you... As silly as it sounds I don't think $1 billion goes as far as it use to. Also, mods, can we rename this thread by chance??

It doesn't surprise me that HKS is the architect on this. They do boring uninspired designs and are yesmen to developers, they will design whatever developers request and whatever is the most budget friendly.

I agree with many of the posts above. I think it’s just too boxy and a little lackluster. If this is what’s going to be built, I just hope that the ground level is great.

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:

Kelley USA wrote:

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:
This is a by product of hiring HKS as your architect. Look at their portfolio. Not one single design that is striking... Maybe it's the developers in Dallas that like boring. Or maybe the local architects are just ass... Right now, I'm leaning towards the latter.

But at the end of the day it's the developers who sign off on these project. I think it has more to do with the developers than the architects. Developers should be demanding more in terms of bolder designs. Of course, the architects are probably always going to say "we can give you more, we can give you bolder, but the cost for your project goes up by $200 million"...

I would agree with you.. but the project is 1 billion dollars. You're telling me this is the best design for 1 Billy? Get outta town. Ass design.

LOL that was my thoughts initially. I’m glad I wasn’t the only one...

This courtyard looks like it might be an extension of Munger Ave, but rather than connecting it to Magnolia St it just dead-ends into a 6-story building, like One Arts Plaza did with Flora. I don't hate the design from this point of view, but I wish the designers had put some effort into connecting the streets.

Any chance we actually see all that greenery and all those trees planted on all those different levels of the buildings? I mean for crying out loud, they have trees planted at the top of the building. Whenever a developer shows us renderings with trees planted on top of the building it almost NEVER comes to fruition. It's like a trick to make the project look more aesthetically pleasing than what it really is.

So, do they have office tenants (and a real hotel name for the hotel, not some wacky made-up name no one's heard of) chomping at the bit to get in this place, or is it spec for now? We don't need a supertall-or-less that's completely empty.

itsjrd1964 wrote:So, do they have office tenants (and a real hotel name for the hotel, not some wacky made-up name no one's heard of) chomping at the bit to get in this place, or is it spec for now? We don't need a supertall-or-less that's completely empty.

They claim they intend to break ground in mid to late 2020 so maybe they have some takers. I am a little flat on this one, do they really have four giant pedestals for parking?

Keep in mind these are concept renderings, not final drawings. This is the sex appeal they are using to attract leases. Once they sign on a lead tenant they will have to make changes based on a lot of factors. I guarantee DART has not signed off on that cover over the tunnel because they don't even have working drawings I bet. DART has merely said they will work with the developer on a solution that benefits both parties. Just like the parking garage built for Trammel Crow tower what they proposed initially is not what they built design-wise. They dumbed it down substantially from the initial concepts.

^Well, this idea dumbed down doesn't sound good. Hopefully some of those changes are positive

Kelley USA wrote:Any chance we actually see all that greenery and all those trees planted on all those different levels of the buildings? I mean for crying out loud, they have trees planted at the top of the building. Whenever a developer shows us renderings with trees planted on top of the building it almost NEVER comes to fruition. It's like a trick to make the project look more aesthetically pleasing than what it really is.

No doubt! Some of these renders look like a scene from I am Legend. lol

I am not saying the design couldn't get better but since no one has publicly signed on I would not bet on these images until at least a construction filing with the city.

DFW wrote:Wonder why the entire office space was not in one tower as a centerpiece? There’s no height restrictions there. It simply looks to crowded. What’s with all those podiums? It needs some useable green areas and space for pedestrians.

Dallas doesn't do height anymore. Sorry. Those 1980s 50 and 60 stories are what you get.

The number of cooks in this kitchen is appropriate when considering who understands the facets of development