Hwulivn wrote:Actually I was speaking to the design of the site and how it connects to and provides transitions bewteen the private and public realms. The components (cladding, including retail uses, etc.) do not compensate for actual design elements (wide enough sidewalks, separation between the sidewalks and the street; rounded, concaved or curved building fronts, 2-3 story lobbies and/or other uses that “open” the building facade to the street and allow the building to “breathe”) at intersections that tie the components together visually or in form. And, again, one of the renderings illustrating a plaza of sorts below street level I think. This is a disconnect from the public street fronts and reduces street level activity. Of course, it’s an improvement over what’s there now, but I just think it could be better. Dallas developers are still learning how to design and build a compelling urban environment. We’ll get there.....hopefully.
I think saying “Dallas developers” is wrong bc your similar comments in this and the Hines thread are dealing with Chicago and Houston based firms that deal in urban environments internationally. There is a difference in what is ideal from armchair observers/enthusiasts, and the people at these companies that answer to shareholders, who research and decipher what is the highest and best use of a limited tract of land from a profit perspective. This particular project, between the parking garage retail and residential tower, is bringing both critical mass residents and more retail to DTD.
Massive 2-3 floor lobbies, not even sure why there would be more than one lobby in this instance, and huge setbacks totally change the project. Again, these companies are spending big money to make money. If they saw more value in this being calibrated to more retail, I’m sure they would do so.