Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Alliance, the nation’s second largest apartment developer according to the National Multifamily Housing Council 2017 rankings, proposes a new multifamily development of approximately 335 units. The site is located at the southeast corner of Armstrong and Cole Avenues and extends south almost to Oliver Street.

At 85 feet, the proposed tower will likely top out at about seven stories, although that specific number is not specified in the statement.

The project site encompasses 2.2 acres. Given the requested height and the known footprint, this project will likely be similar in appearance to Alliance’s Broadstone brand, one of which was recently completed in West Dallas — and probably nothing like the Miro apartment tower the company built in Uptown.

http://dallas.towers.net/2017/12/15/dev ... henderson/

Sorry if this has been posted already, it's hard to keep up with all the small/mid-sized projects going on.

This development has been mentioned before in the general Knox Street thread. It needs it's own thread though as it seems to be moving forward.

I think the latest iteration of the plan is different from the Dallas Towers article referred to below. That plan was presented to OLC for review and was not received well. Since then, I think they proposed a different version which included a 22 story tower at the Armstrong (north) end of the property and three story apartments for the rest of the lot.

Here is a link from last month about the latest proposal:
https://candysdirt.com/2017/10/04/allia ... e-project/

There are some meetings with the developer and the neighborhood locals set up early next week. Hopefully we can get some more information then.

A great location for a tower and would be a great spot for some retail at that corner!

Sorry about the typo in the title guys. This will not be 22 St (or 240 ST ). From the article this will be, at most, seven stories tall:

At 85 feet, the proposed tower will likely top out at about seven stories, although that specific number is not specified in the statement.

DPatel304 wrote:Sorry about the typo in the title guys. This will not be 22 St (or 240 ST ). From the article this will be, at most, seven stories tall:

At 85 feet, the proposed tower will likely top out at about seven stories, although that specific number is not specified in the statement.

We'll see. The Candy's Dirt article actually says the revised proposed tower is 22 stories.

My understanding was that it was to have a tower included in the latest iteration.

^ Good to know! Sounds like it's certainly possible (and likely) that a tower will go here, but I went ahead and just took out that information, for now, out of the topic title.

Looks like the tower component of this proposed development is out. OLC rejected the idea outright and asked Alliance to go back and get neighborhood support. The neighbors apparently also said “no tower.”

Alliance has returned to and tweaked the original proposal (5 and 7 stories) with setbacks along Cole as the building gets higher (no setback on Armstrong). They propose all underground parking, street level apt access (sounds like The Hudson going up on McKinney Ave north of Knox in that respect). They will keep the Live Oak trees along Cole and add 6 ft sidewalks. All wins considering what is there now. The ask is to go up to 85’ height. Current zoning only allow 35’ which seems odd directly across the street from an 18 story office. Next step is an early January OLC meeting.

A DMN story about this proposed project:
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/rea ... able-units

If this gets approved, there will definitely need to be traffic solutions for Armstrong at both Cole and McKinney Ave. There are currently crosswalks, but you would never know it by the speed of the cars up and down Cole and McKinney. The two way conversion and eventual addition of the streetcar will calm somewhat, but those are a ways off.

The developer wants to keep the Live Oaks along Cole and expand the sidewalk significantly, both good for the neighborhood. Some concerns remain about the amount of one bedrooms (70-80%) in this project. I'm all for adding density, but would prefer less transient density.

LongonBigD wrote:Some concerns remain about the amount of one bedrooms (70-80%) in this project. I'm all for adding density, but would prefer less transient density.

lol what

tanzoak wrote:

LongonBigD wrote:Some concerns remain about the amount of one bedrooms (70-80%) in this project. I'm all for adding density, but would prefer less transient density.

lol what

How does a 2 bed room make a renter less transient?..

If Developments can't have single bedroom units in the city...say bye to affordable living.

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:

tanzoak wrote:

LongonBigD wrote:Some concerns remain about the amount of one bedrooms (70-80%) in this project. I'm all for adding density, but would prefer less transient density.

lol what

How does a 2 bed room make a renter less transient?..

If Developments can't have single bedroom units in the city...say bye to affordable living.

I believe the housing market as we know it has changed in the last decade. Renting is becoming a viable option to owning. It is extremely difficult to raise a family in a one-bedroom unit whether you own it or rent it.

I am not advocating not allowing single bedroom units in the city. I'm just not sure 70-80% is the right balance for future housing needs. If Dallas continues to build primarily one bedroom units in these new projects, people who eventually need more room will leave Dallas for the suburbs leading to more sprawl. Eventually the only people who can live in the city center are the very rich. That doesn't sound like a neighborhood I want to live in. If I did, I could just move five blocks west and live in a bubble. I prefer the diversity of Knox Park.

TRANSIENT
adjective
1. not lasting, enduring, or permanent; transitory.
2. lasting only a short time; existing briefly; temporary: transient authority.
3. staying only a short time

In order to encourage long-term stable residency in this neighborhood, more families need to live here. Families of no more than two are about all that can/will live in a one-bedroom unit. I see this already in the townhome stock around here. Young people move into the (mostly) two-bedroom townhomes, marry and start a family. One child is manageable (although not ideal with bedrooms on the 1st and 3rd floors), but as soon as they have two kids, they pick up and move. People who only live somewhere for 2-3 years aren't typically as invested in the community, schools, government, etc.

My point is....while new projects are being built that increase the population density, can we have some housing stock which will encourage families to put down roots and stay for a while? I would prefer for people to move here and stay here, be invested in the immediate community and contribute to making the area better for all.

Dallas builds way more 3+ bedroom units than many other places, btw. All of those townhouse projects. Not to mention that the existing single-fam housing stock is also a much higher proportion in Dallas than many other cities. Dallas definitely does not suffer a lack of family-sized units.

They leave not because of housing they leave because they can't afford private schooling on top of housing so they move to where they have public schools that they consider worth the sacrifice of moving to the burbs. It has been this way for decades.

As soon as a handful of these new residents 'pioneer' their kids in the public schools in the neighborhood, the effect will be reversed.

I would love to see any data showing that happening in DISD. I just don't see it happening I just see people making between 50,000 and 150,000 moving to the burbs. If you make more than 150,000 then you can afford private.

Unless you mean WAY more than 150,000 (like twice that number), that's not an accurate statement.

Tuition at Hockaday, Urselin, and similar private schools is around $40K a year, so after a $5,000 - $9,000 mortgage, a car payment or two, all the rest of a family's expenses, spending an extra, unnecessary $3,000+ a month is not in the cards for people making $150K.

Are the schools really that bad? I mean Irving, Arlington and Garland have slightly better school districts than DISD...These are the school districts were regular families making less than 150k send their kids to.

https://www.davedowns.com/best-school-districts-dfw.php

I know there are some outstanding public schools in Dallas; some ranked among the best in the nation.

It's really the upper middle class people who do private school(people who enroll their kids in private school do it cause they can afford it). The way you keep those people in town is by lower their costs. Lower the cost of living within the city and you can make private school attainable for them.

Secondly, if the housing costs are lowered everyone else wins too.

DISD will only get better if people enroll their children in the schools. This will eventually happen. It just takes time. In the interim I say lower housing costs.

They leave not because of housing they leave because they can't afford private schooling on top of housing so they move to where they have public schools that they consider worth the sacrifice of moving to the burbs

I'm not sure I believe that is true today, though it probably was true historically. Now, people leave Dallas because their jobs/commute is somewhere else. It's not perfect, but you can see this in the city area and student populations.

DISD: 150k in 385 sq miles.
Frisco/Plano/Lewisville districts, the next 3 of 4 largest ordered by student population: 163k in 185 sq miles, also where most of the job growth has been occurring. If you add enough places to get to 300 sq miles, you'll essentially triple DISD student population. That's why Dallas needs both more families and more jobs density.

eburress wrote:Unless you mean WAY more than 150,000 (like twice that number), that's not an accurate statement.

Tuition at Hockaday, Urselin, and similar private schools is around $40K a year, so after a $5,000 - $9,000 mortgage, a car payment or two, all the rest of a family's expenses, spending an extra, unnecessary $3,000+ a month is not in the cards for people making $150K.

I love how $5k/mo is at the low end of your mortgage payment range. That's a $1m mortgage (like a $1.3m home at 20% down). If that hypothetical household could instead deal with a $650k house (the horror!), that $2,500/mo lower monthly bill pays for St. Mark's/Hockaday (which is $30k for HS, not $40k).

Tuition isn't cheap, but it's certainly doable for households making $150k, provided that they prioritize their children's education over having the absolute largest house they can.

tanzoak wrote:

eburress wrote:Unless you mean WAY more than 150,000 (like twice that number), that's not an accurate statement.

Tuition at Hockaday, Urselin, and similar private schools is around $40K a year, so after a $5,000 - $9,000 mortgage, a car payment or two, all the rest of a family's expenses, spending an extra, unnecessary $3,000+ a month is not in the cards for people making $150K.

I love how $5k/mo is at the low end of your mortgage payment range. That's a $1m mortgage (like a $1.3m home at 20% down). If that hypothetical household could instead deal with a $650k house (the horror!), that $2,500/mo lower monthly bill pays for St. Mark's/Hockaday (which is $30k for HS, not $40k).

Tuition isn't cheap, but it's certainly doable for households making $150k, provided that they prioritize their children's education over having the absolute largest house they can.

What makes more financial sense to people, spending $650K on a turnkey house in Frisco or spending $650K on a (much older, smaller) house in-town that requires an additional $3K monthly education cost?

I've been shopping them a lot lately, and a comparably new/nice family-sized home (4+ bedrooms) in Bluffview, Preston Hollow, Midway Hollow, Lakewood, M Streets, Inwood Meadow, etc do all start out around $1M+. About Hockaday, my wife and I just met with them and while the price for the lower grades does start out around $33K, tuition for a child in the higher grades is $40K annually.

eburress wrote:

tanzoak wrote:

eburress wrote:Unless you mean WAY more than 150,000 (like twice that number), that's not an accurate statement.

Tuition at Hockaday, Urselin, and similar private schools is around $40K a year, so after a $5,000 - $9,000 mortgage, a car payment or two, all the rest of a family's expenses, spending an extra, unnecessary $3,000+ a month is not in the cards for people making $150K.

I love how $5k/mo is at the low end of your mortgage payment range. That's a $1m mortgage (like a $1.3m home at 20% down). If that hypothetical household could instead deal with a $650k house (the horror!), that $2,500/mo lower monthly bill pays for St. Mark's/Hockaday (which is $30k for HS, not $40k).

Tuition isn't cheap, but it's certainly doable for households making $150k, provided that they prioritize their children's education over having the absolute largest house they can.

What makes more financial sense to people, spending $650K on a turnkey house in Frisco or spending $650K on a (much older, smaller) house in-town that requires an additional $3K monthly education cost?

I've been shopping them a lot lately, and a comparably new/nice family-sized home (4+ bedrooms) in Bluffview, Preston Hollow, Midway Hollow, Lakewood, M Streets, Inwood Meadow, etc do all start out around $1M+. About Hockaday, my wife and I just met with them and while the price for the lower grades does start out around $33K, tuition for a child in the higher grades is $40K annually.

I mean, I guess it depends on the value you put on your kids education (and your commuting time). I went to elementary school in HPISD before transferring to SM, and the difference was night and day.

But yeah, no one's denying that elite education is expensive, just that it's not some crazy constraint for upper middle class people.

Btw, Hockaday's website indicates $25k for lower school and $30k for middle and upper school.

https://www.hockaday.org/page/admission ... n-and-fees

That's what we thought too, but those aren't the only costs. hahaha With the "required uniforms, books, optional activities, and individual needs" (which includes a mandatory new laptop), the costs go way up.

This is off-topic, but it's precisely what we're dealing with now, trying to decide between Bluffview + Hockaday and Park Cities + HPISD. Do you mind elaborating on how the difference between HPISD and Saint Mark's was night and day? Maybe PM me, so I don't further sidetrack the conversation.

I was told this project was approved by the Oaklawn Committee by a 20-8 vote. I guess the next step is Dallas City Hall for review/approval.

I went to SM as well. Grew up in the Park Cities. Park Cities schools are nice, but they're way different than going to an SM or Hockaday. Particularly with regards to the facilities, and size of classes. When you have 15 kids in a class, those kids are going to get a lot more attention than a kid in a class with 40 kids. Not to mention, academics are way more rigorous at SM/Hockaday/Greenhill (ESD is a joke!). I probably graduated in the bottom third of my class at SM.

Always wondered if I would've gotten into better colleges if I had gone to HP and graduated towards the top of the class.

Has it really been almost an entire year since the last posting about this project? The wheels of development turn slowly.

Some news...demolition is well under way on several existing buildings, townhomes vacated, and fencing around the entire site including orange net fencing around lots of the trees on this block (hopefully an indicator of keeping them as proposed by developer).

Demo almost complete. Here is a reminder of what’s planned and a shot of the (now) empty lots with Nove at Knox under construction in the background a block over.

They are digging an absolutely massive pit for this thing. Must be all underground parking.

I believe it is all underground parking. The pool will be ground level on Cole. Typically they put those on top of a garage.

I'm a little envious of the folks who will move into this development--that immediate area of Knox is so nice and walkable...Trader Joe's is on the doorstep, the Katy Trail, all the shops and restaurants and amenities of Knox. Such a nice little pocket surrounded by soon-to-be upgraded retail.

And yes, the hole they're digging is HUGE!

Crane is up for this development kitty-corner from Trader Joes at Cole and Armstrong.

Here is a link to GFF website which has several renderings of the landscaping for this project I have not seen before.

https://gff.com/view/broadstone-knox-district-landscape/

They intend to integrate the ground level amenities (pool, outdoor fireplace, etc) at street level on Cole and...as previously reported...keep most all the existing Live Oak trees. This is possible because parking is underground - hence the ginormous pit that exists now.

This one is almost topped out. Will step back along Cole Ave and 7 stories at alley (diagonally across from Trader Joe’s)

I would argue this area is hot right now for sure. There is this project, NOVE which has opened recently, Modera is building a tower at 75 and McCommas Blvd near where The Hudson already opened last March. Plus when you add in Weirs Tower and the Restoration Hardware store/restaurant you've got a neighborhood with a lot of new units coming online in consistent pace with solid commercial turnover as well.

Untitled by rlopez2011, on Flickr
Untitled by rlopez2011, on Flickr
Untitled by rlopez2011, on Flickr

Untitled by rlopez2011, on Flickr

The brickwork looks to be completed on this corner which faces Trader Joe’s. Not sure what material is planned around the windows.

Interesting addition across Armstrong street, in the base of the glass tower (Highland Park Place) is the addition of Chicago coffee shop, Fairgrounds. This faces TJ’s and adds some much needed street presence to this tower.