DTD: Field Street District - Phase I (~405FT | 33 ST + 26 ST)

[Tnexster]

Developers plan two more downtown Dallas towers in $1 billion Field Street project
Work on an 18-story office building and 25-floor apartment high-rise could kick off in March.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/rea ... t-project/

[IcedCowboyCoffee]

The size changes make sense; less office space and more residential. I won't sit here and pretend the previous placeholder design was particularly great, but, here is another example of original plans steadily getting simpler with each proposed iteration until they just become a box.

Previous:

fd1.jpg

to:

fd2.jpg

[eburress]

What in the actual &#%@? An entire city block filled with single story buildings, each with parking out front? Is this serious?

[Dallas_Uptown]

Very...boxy.

[Dallas_Uptown]

What in the actual &#%@? An entire city block filled with single story buildings, each with parking out front? Is this serious?

Yes, what the F are those things?

[IcedCowboyCoffee]

What in the actual &#%@? An entire city block filled with single story buildings, each with parking out front? Is this serious?

Yes, what the F are those things?

Maybe the saddest part of this idea is they didn't even close the middle section between the shops off to traffic. It's literally a corridor for cars to unnecessarily pass through, there's not even parking spaces in the middle to justify cars needing to travel there to reach them. It's just for showing off your car to pedestrians I guess? Valet? Which is very Dallas.

You can see it at ground level on their portfolio page:
https://www.pacelm.com/portfolio (click the arrows, don't go directly to the Field st. 'learn more' page)

[zblevinz555]

Stack em on top of each other!!! Good god this is embarrassing. You for one could have a taller building, and two you could conserve space for future growth. Am I missing something here or is it just me that these developers pretend they’re building in Salt Lake City. But really why in the world would they not just stack em to conserve space for future growth.

[BigD5349]

Terrible. Our real estate developers absolutely suck.

[Tivo_Kenevil]

LMAO LOL HAHAHA

[dallaz]

You know what, this doesn’t even surprise me anymore. Meanwhile Atlanta (our peer city), just broke ground on a 60 story/730 ft mixed use skyscraper. https://youtu.be/2l_nGYjBDMo

That’s basically the icing on the cake for all the towers going up in Midtown ATL. I’m really wondering why is it so hard to replicate this in Dallas? BTW doesn’t this site have unlimited height? Why build them so short and not take advantage of that…? Or at least preserve a portion of the site for a signature tower, maybe?

[CTroyMathis]

What in the actual &#%@? An entire city block filled with single story buildings, each with parking out front? Is this serious?

Technically, those are disposable architecture placeholders, but, yeah. Harwood Int'l is also doing this with Te Deseo and Happiest Hour. See also, volleyball and that other stuff.

[CTroyMathis]

Two weeks ago this was already mentioned how it was going to play out on scope. I didn't include the links because I knew the megahertz would wind up tight and loud. Also, no, there is not an unlimited height. Taller yes, but, unlimited of course not.

[Hannibal Lecter]

Am I missing something here or is it just me that these developers pretend they’re building in Salt Lake City. But really why in the world would they not just stack em to conserve space for future growth.

Costs per SF start going up and leasable area per floor starts going down as you add more floors. Things like more elevator shafts, more/larger conduits for power and HVAC, adding pumps to get water to the upper floors, more/larger/stiffer columns to support the weight and reduce movement due to wind and earthquakes, etc...

See https://buildingtheskyline.org/skyscraper-height-iv/#:~:text=Going%20taller%20and%20taller%20requires,needs%20to%20support%20more%20weight.

[rono3849]

fd.towers.jpg

I'm not convinced this will actually break ground. It's still just on paper and as the interest rates go higher, this project just gets shorter. Twin 20-story towers might be exciting for a spot on Regal Row off of Stemmons Frwy, but not off of Woodall Rogers Frwy in Downtown Dallas. This is just sad. Higher buildings are being built in Frisco & Plano off of the Dallas North Tollway. Heck two 30-story buildings are being built in Uptown right now. Big fail.

[zblevinz555]

Am I missing something here or is it just me that these developers pretend they’re building in Salt Lake City. But really why in the world would they not just stack em to conserve space for future growth.

Costs per SF start going up and leasable area per floor starts going down as you add more floors. Things like more elevator shafts, more/larger conduits for power and HVAC, adding pumps to get water to the upper floors, more/larger/stiffer columns to support the weight and reduce movement due to wind and earthquakes, etc...

See https://buildingtheskyline.org/skyscraper-height-iv/#:~:text=Going%20taller%20and%20taller%20requires,needs%20to%20support%20more%20weight.

You make a great point. But I’m thinking more long term investment. While cost of all that you mention is more with taller buildings, there is now an extra parcel for future business/residential/retail opportunities allowing for more growth that would absorb the higher cost that you mentioned with taller buildings. Idk I’m jus thinking of more long term investment.

[mhainli]

Am I missing something here or is it just me that these developers pretend they’re building in Salt Lake City. But really why in the world would they not just stack em to conserve space for future growth.

Costs per SF start going up and leasable area per floor starts going down as you add more floors. Things like more elevator shafts, more/larger conduits for power and HVAC, adding pumps to get water to the upper floors, more/larger/stiffer columns to support the weight and reduce movement due to wind and earthquakes, etc...

See https://buildingtheskyline.org/skyscraper-height-iv/#:~:text=Going%20taller%20and%20taller%20requires,needs%20to%20support%20more%20weight.

You make a great point. But I’m thinking more long term investment. While cost of all that you mention is more with taller buildings, there is now an extra parcel for future business/residential/retail opportunities allowing for more growth that would absorb the higher cost that you mentioned with taller buildings. Idk I’m jus thinking of more long term investment.

Yes indeed this is a low risk, low complexity pair of buildings that is typical of many Dallas developers. The build, lease, sell quickly short term mentality.. In this case the 2 buildings side by side look like one big squatty building - unfortunately cutting off views to and from DT more than a taller single building. The fear should also be that the remainder of the site could handle 2 more similar squatty buildings making it even worse. The ultimate long term investment for the entire site should be 2 taller mixed-use towers with more room at the base for retail, restaurants, etc. But “mixed-use” and “long term” are four letter words in Dallas…

[Tucy]

The massing is horrible. Think of the views from the apartments on the west side of that building, exactly lined up with the office building that is only, what, maybe 90 feet away? Well, at least they won't be bothered by the westerly sun (or any direct sunlight, for that matter).

[eburress]

Sun avoidance a.k.a., "eco-friendly design," would surely be featured in the building's marketing materials! lol

[R1070]

One structure needs more height than the other. It looks odd with the two towers the same height.

[BigD5349]

It would be nice if the towers were taller, and I get that the economics need to work out. I get that office leasing is challenging and the market is trying to find its balance post covid. What gets me is that the Dallas Arts District and KWP were supposed to spur marque real estate development for this entire area to become the centerpiece of Dallas. The centerpiece of the 4th largest metro area in the USA.

What we got was a sterile and lifeless arts district with Woodall Rodgers lined by bland corporate architecture. This particular location has the square footage, location and massing possibilities to propel all of downtown Dallas forward. This development ain’t that.

[thelivingworld]

This isn't really Klyde Warren Park or even really on Field Street either prestigious south of Woodall Rodgers McKinney Ave address and all. In phase 3 or 4 of this neighborhood we can get something better. It's surrounded by empty lots. If we got something taller we'd just get the same design scaled up and we would all hate what that'd do to the skyline. I don't know this seems fine as a first phase. Eventually things like the ease of car accessibility can be retrofitted to be more urban and walkable. The key to me is just plugging in something decent there so that a wanderer into the area doesn't just turn back around. Maybe Mr. EEAAO will do something interesting with his acres and acres of land near there.

[mhainli]

The massing is horrible. Think of the views from the apartments on the west side of that building, exactly lined up with the office building that is only, what, maybe 90 feet away? Well, at least they won't be bothered by the westerly sun (or any direct sunlight, for that matter).

Yes, this is a horrific design.

[citygeek]

Dallas is just pathetic with this lack of imagination. Truly deplorable.

[zblevinz555]

Someone email Derrick Evers at Kaizen Development and remind him he’s in Dallas effin Texas and not Salt Lake City.

[I45Tex]

https://www.papercitymag.com/real-estat ... ts/#261678

Three and a half years ago it was a matter of connecting the city like never before. Woods is investing in the Knox Park area but if they can't get people out of their seats to come this far downtown they at least know and appreciate what that kind of connection here looks like. If their desire is to be successful a la Knox Henderson or Trinity Groves, then their first step should be to make Field Street District better than and contiguous with the West End.

[I45Tex]

I wish that they would lower their reward and also their risk by becoming "master developers" and selling ground leases for multiple small parcels to other investors. They could stipulate the timeframe and minimum value, minimum floor count or style or whatever they wanted without having to find financing themselves, as long as it pays back their own debts on the land.

[Tnexster]

You know what, this doesn’t even surprise me anymore. Meanwhile Atlanta (our peer city), just broke ground on a 60 story/730 ft mixed use skyscraper. https://youtu.be/2l_nGYjBDMo

That’s basically the icing on the cake for all the towers going up in Midtown ATL. I’m really wondering why is it so hard to replicate this in Dallas? BTW doesn’t this site have unlimited height? Why build them so short and not take advantage of that…? Or at least preserve a portion of the site for a signature tower, maybe?

Interesting, and I wish Dallas would do a 60 story mixed use tower. However, this one is kinda bland as towers go and it looks like the typical box on a podium design we see everywhere. The two taller towers we did get downtown were better looking than this one.

[RodB]

My bet is that they don't get built anyway.

[Tnexster]

My bet is that they don't get built anyway.

This was from the 2019 story.

[Cbdallas]

As long as we still have so much unbuilt land in our urban core I doubt we see anything near supertall levels. It will take several lower height buildings that get built over existing parking lots for the time being. Eventually land will become scarce and we will see the height go up slowly over time.

[kingkong34]

Is the Dart line still planed for this spot? If not, I could see this thing actually going through with it being built. LOL.

[thelivingworld]

My bet is that they don't get built anyway.

This was from the 2019 story.

This render is pre-D2 being effectively cancelled with potential station integration and newly built pedestrian access with the Perot. D2 was doomed to fail just due to the distance you had to walk to get to the trains (see below). With 2023 eyes this design is the definition of overbuilt, bland and derivative. The massing on these is truly horrific. We generally don't have tall buildings that close together in Dallas unless the buildings are at an angle to each other. Salt Lake City is famously planned with wide blocks and streets that remind one of Pyongyang (Joseph Smith was an enthusiastic urban planner) while Dallas is famously minimally planned and has inherited a beautiful mess of a street network. I don't think it could turn into Salt Lake City if it tried. The previous design was basically new fangled downtown Mockingbird Station superimposed here which we might take in some scenarios but there were endless questions about D2 to be settled.

[dallaz]

You know what, this doesn’t even surprise me anymore. Meanwhile Atlanta (our peer city), just broke ground on a 60 story/730 ft mixed use skyscraper. https://youtu.be/2l_nGYjBDMo

That’s basically the icing on the cake for all the towers going up in Midtown ATL. I’m really wondering why is it so hard to replicate this in Dallas? BTW doesn’t this site have unlimited height? Why build them so short and not take advantage of that…? Or at least preserve a portion of the site for a signature tower, maybe?

Interesting, and I wish Dallas would do a 60 story mixed use tower. However, this one is kinda bland as towers go and it looks like the typical box on a podium design we see everywhere. The two taller towers we did get downtown were better looking than this one.

I agree, when it comes to the design. It leaves a lot to be desired. I guess, I am just perplexed as to why other similar sunbelt cities can pump out large mixed use towers and Dallas is stuck with getting squatty high-rises. I mean, this is the 4th largest metro area and we can't even get a building taller than 42 stories built in downtown. Like another poster said, why not stack it?

[thelivingworld]

You know what, this doesn’t even surprise me anymore. Meanwhile Atlanta (our peer city), just broke ground on a 60 story/730 ft mixed use skyscraper. https://youtu.be/2l_nGjBDMo

That’s basically the icing on the cake for all the towers going up in Midtown ATL. I’m really wondering why is it so hard to replicate this in Dallas? BTW doesn’t this site have unlimited height? Why build them so short and not take advantage of that…? Or at least preserve a portion of the site for a signature tower, maybe?

Interesting, and I wish Dallas would do a 60 story mixed use tower. However, this one is kinda bland as towers go and it looks like the typical box on a podium design we see everywhere. The two taller towers we did get downtown were better looking than this one.

I agree, when it comes to the design. It leaves a lot to be desired. I guess, I am just perplexed as to why other similar sunbelt cities can pump out large mixed use towers and Dallas is stuck with getting squatty high-rises. I mean, this is the 4th largest metro area and we can't even get a building taller than 42 stories built in downtown. Like another poster said, why not stack it?

It's better for screening the freeway for the restaurant and retail guests, cheaper and easier to design, build, manage having the office and multifamily in separate buildings. Two squatty buildings will have more ground presence than one thinner tower. Does it matter if it's one 43 story building vs. a 25 story building and a 18 story building? Why build tall in downtown when you can build in Oak Lawn, Turtle Creek, Uptown, Knox Henderson, Deep Ellum and potentially in a half dozen other places in the future? I think in general these other Sunbelt cities have fewer development hotspots. Houston has Uptown, Atlanta has Buckhead Village, Austin has the Domain, but these are all 5-10 miles from downtown.

Anyways that's always been the slightly NIMBYish cynical take about why there isn't more development downtown in that the zoning is too liberal elsewhere in the city.

[eburress]

There are a few reasons why there isn't more residential development Downtown, the biggest of which being that other parts of the city have been, and probably continue to be, much more desirable places to live.

[The_Overdog]

There are a few reasons why there isn't more residential development Downtown, the biggest of which being that other parts of the city have been, and probably continue to be, much more desirable places to live.

----

I think this is true, but remember, in 1995 downtown had a population of 200 people, and didn't have more than 10k until about 8 years ago. Most of the rest of the city has had continuous residential populations for 50+ years.

[eburress]

100%. Downtown is definitely moving in the right direction, and the pace will surely pick up with the completion of the various parks and public spaces

[thelivingworld]

Downtown never been in a better position in my opinion. Harwood Park will open September, office to conversions are happening at a large scale , there are fantastic developers Woods Capital and Todd Interests and others who have vision and passion for downtown, I think I see DDI at council more than before, a lot of council members have spoken passionately about downtown. We at the point where the growth could become self perpetuating.

In Chicago another city with fantastic decently dense neighborhoods in their Loop which is similar in area to downtown had about 16,000 people in 2000 about where Dallas will be soon up to, from 12,000 in 1990. It took a decade to gain 4000 people. In 2010 they had 29,000 and had 42,000 in 2020. So I think much greater growth from what we've seen is possible. Similar story in River North, DTLA, Denver.

[R1070]

What was the height of the tallest building in the original rendering? How does it compare to what is proposed now for the office building?
I do like that the 2nd tower is taller, than originally planned though.

[I45Tex]

In the 2019 renders I count 37 floors (perhaps only 30 of office atop the podium though) plus an additional two floor sky ceiling feature or mechanical penthouse fin.

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... in-dallas/

It is visibly, clearly much shorter than the 579' Ross Tower / Lincoln Plaza at 500 N. Akard, but probably taller than the 450ish foot San Jacinto Tower on Ross. So I'll guess it had been ballparked to be in the neighborhood of 500' or a hundred feet higher than our new rendering.

[I45Tex]

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... in-dallas/

It is visibly, clearly much shorter than the 579' Ross Tower / Lincoln Plaza at 500 N. Akard, because it is the same height despite being a quarter mile closer to the camera viewer than that background tower. By the same ticket it is probably taller than the 456' San Jacinto Tower on Ross.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Tower
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2100_Ross_Avenue

Now edited with links.

[zblevinz555]

I’m not asking this sarcastically, but I don’t understand the delays, the amount of undelivered projects in Dallas, when Atlanta is throwing up a 730 footer, Austin a super tall, and I know NYC vs Dallas is apples to oranges but they have a new super tall resi seems like every time you look at their skyline. Besides the obvious economic conditions, post pandemic lag, and those variables what is it with Dallas not being able to deliver on these big projects in a decent amount of time? Is it the unelected bureaucrats in Dallas? I’m jus sick of googling “new towers planned in Dallas” and get the same puff piece articles by SB. Sorry for the long rant just pisses me off lol

[R1070]

Dallas goes through proposal booms and out of those booms, we end up with some of the developments. The market is changing now and Dallas developers are never in a big rush to get things built.

[Hannibal Lecter]

I’m not asking this sarcastically, but I don’t understand the delays, the amount of undelivered projects in Dallas, when Atlanta is throwing up a 730 footer, Austin a super tall, and I know NYC vs Dallas is apples to oranges but they have a new super tall resi seems like every time you look at their skyline. Besides the obvious economic conditions, post pandemic lag, and those variables what is it with Dallas not being able to deliver on these big projects in a decent amount of time? Is it the unelected bureaucrats in Dallas? I’m jus sick of googling “new towers planned in Dallas” and get the same puff piece articles by SB. Sorry for the long rant just pisses me off lol

I suspect that few of the users here are old enough to remember the late 1980's Texas real estate/banking apocalypse. It's probably as relevant to you as the Great Depression. But the people running the banks and development companies today lived through the half-finished buildings, the see-through office towers, the bankruptcies, the bank failures, the alphabet soup of the RTC, FDIC and FSLIC -- and the prison sentences. You rarely loose your job for the building you don't build or the loan you don't make.

When the next real estate recession comes -- and it will -- Dallas developers will be the ones looking smart. Remember Gordon Moore's mantra: "Only the paranoid survive."

[eburress]

Very true, and in fact Dallas and its developers are already looking smart in this regard. Granted it wasn't on purpose, but we are way ahead of the curve on converting surplus office to residential. San Fran for example, where the office vacancy rate is anecdotally* well over 60%, hasn't even begun the process of converting its office to residential.


* Apparently the official stats don't yet show how empty the buildings actually are. Many, like Salesforce Tower, are leased but sit completely empty.

[Addison]

I’m not asking this sarcastically, but I don’t understand the delays, the amount of undelivered projects in Dallas, when Atlanta is throwing up a 730 footer, Austin a super tall, and I know NYC vs Dallas is apples to oranges but they have a new super tall resi seems like every time you look at their skyline. Besides the obvious economic conditions, post pandemic lag, and those variables what is it with Dallas not being able to deliver on these big projects in a decent amount of time? Is it the unelected bureaucrats in Dallas? I’m jus sick of googling “new towers planned in Dallas” and get the same puff piece articles by SB. Sorry for the long rant just pisses me off lol

From my post in another thread:

1. Austin has very quick permitting & rezoning processes. In an era of high inflation and labor shrotages, time is money, and developers ain't got time to pussyfoot around for months with Dallas' slow & dysfunctional process.

2. I understand there are height restriction in downtown Dallas that don't really affect downtown Austin due to Love Field's proximity.

3. Downtown Dallas is not the geographic nor population center of DFW (for now, Addison, Carrollton and Irving are) and it's bleeding workers/companies. Developers take note of this and become convinced the demand isn't there. Meanwhile, downtown Austin *IS* the geographic/population center of its region.

[Addison]

I’m not asking this sarcastically, but I don’t understand the delays, the amount of undelivered projects in Dallas, when Atlanta is throwing up a 730 footer, Austin a super tall, and I know NYC vs Dallas is apples to oranges but they have a new super tall resi seems like every time you look at their skyline. Besides the obvious economic conditions, post pandemic lag, and those variables what is it with Dallas not being able to deliver on these big projects in a decent amount of time? Is it the unelected bureaucrats in Dallas? I’m jus sick of googling “new towers planned in Dallas” and get the same puff piece articles by SB. Sorry for the long rant just pisses me off lol

From my post in another thread:

1. Austin has very quick permitting & rezoning processes. In an era of high inflation and labor shrotages, time is money, and developers ain't got time to pussyfoot around for months with Dallas' slow & dysfunctional process.

2. I understand there are height restriction in downtown Dallas that don't really affect downtown Austin due to Love Field's proximity.

3. Downtown Dallas is not the geographic nor population center of DFW (for now, Addison, Carrollton and Irving are) and it's bleeding workers/companies. Developers take note of this and become convinced the demand isn't there. Meanwhile, downtown Austin *IS* the geographic/population center of its region.

The long & short of it (and probably not something many want to hear), expectations must be adjusted for Dallas developments. If folks are looking for massive pretty-looking skyscrapers or for Dallas to become some urban Disneyland, that's not happening any time soon.

And instead of wallowing in doom & gloom about the city's future, let's focus on the positives:

The broader metro area is still exploding with growth/development, the broader metro area remains an economic juggernaut, we're doing better than most metros to build much-needed housing and Dallas' core has made great progress with urban infill the past decade.

And as much as people criticize DART and specifically the Silver Line for its drawbacks, we're doing better than most non-coastal metros (excluding Chicago obviously).

[I45Tex]

Just to nitpick, not sure how downtown Austin strikes people as geographically central. There is a lot more population north than south: Williamson County, 610,000
Hays County, 240,000, and Bastrop County, 97,000

[The_Overdog]

Dallas still needs to fixing it's zoning and permitting departments. From all I've heard, the systems are still terrible, and the wait times only slightly improved with the addition of extra staff.

[Addison]

Just to nitpick, not sure how downtown Austin strikes people as geographically central. There is a lot more population north than south: Williamson County, 610,000
Hays County, 240,000, and Bastrop County, 97,000

Eh, it still seems fairly balanced when looking at this map...

https://www.austinchamber.com/economic- ... on-density