PDA

View Full Version : Prosper area expected to flourish --> How far can we go?



gc
22 September 2003, 11:30 AM
Prosper area expected to flourish
David Wethe - Staff Writer
http://dallas.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2003/09/22/story7.html?page=1

Hoping that the housing boom continues its northward push past Frisco, developers from Dallas and Colleyville recently closed on 292 acres in far Northeast Denton County.

Located just west of the small but growing town of Prosper, the land is plotted for 902 homes priced between $100,000 and $250,000.

Led by Dallas-based Avex Group as the general partner, West Prosper 150 Investment Partners Ltd. bought the land Aug. 18 for $4.8 million from a group of family members led by Walter L. Reynolds and Willie Ray Reynolds, according to Denton County deed records.

The same day, the West Prosper group sold 154 acres of that land to Colleyville developer Robert Beall.

In addition to housing, the land will have about 25 acres of retail at the northeast corner of the property, said Mac Lawson, a partner in the Avex Group.

Although Beall and Lawson said they plan to develop their properties separately, both projected housing construction to start in about two years.

Beall said it would take that long to perform flood-plain and engineering studies.

Located north of U.S. 380, which connects Denton to McKinney, the land is bordered on the north by County Road 48 and on the east by County Line Road, which will be the future extension of Legacy Drive, Lawson said. Construction of Legacy has already begun south of the property, Lawson said.

The 12-year-old Avex Group has been a partner in 30 mixed-use projects around the Metroplex, Houston and Denver, Lawson said.

"We think most of our acquisitions are based on population growth, assuming that the populations are going to continue to grow in Dallas," he said. "These properties are in the path of that eventual expansion."

David Brown, director of the Dallas office for residential consultant Metrostudy, agrees.

"The whole (U.S.) 380 corridor has been getting a lot of attention from homebuilders over the last year or two," Brown said.

The nearby Collin County town of Prosper -- with a population of about 2,700 -- saw a total of 130 housing starts during the 12 months ended June 30 and 55 during the second quarter of 2003, according to Metrostudy.

"Those are still small numbers," Brown said, "but it's showing strong growth numbers overall."

Ted Wilson, a partner in Residential Strategies Inc., said he expects Prosper to be the next logical spot for residential development after Frisco gets built out.

"My expectation is we're going to look up six to 10 years from now and Prosper is going to be the destination spot for custom builders," Wilson said.

Because the recently purchased land is in an unincorporated area of Denton County, water and sewer infrastructure will need to be added to the site, said Beall, who's working on another 119-acre residential project in the city of Denton.

"This isn't where we're going to be able to get houses built on the site real soon," Beall said. "But we just think as the city continues to go north, we want to be positioned for that part of the Metroplex."

Contact DBJ writer David Wethe at dwethe@bizjournals.com or (817) 693-0025.

tamtagon
22 September 2003, 12:29 PM
As the mad northward suburban rush continues over the next decade, the nature of the developemnts will be forced to adopt a new construction model not previously seen in Garland/Mesquite, then Plano, and now Frisco. The physical presence of Denton and McKinney will reshape any masterplan hoping to roll out over thousands of acres for the next 500,000 suburban dwellers. Most affected will be business centers. While there is still plenty of open space in southern Denton and Collin counties, the cost effective nature the current corporate campuses will not exist once things begin to get a little more crowded. Give it another decade then Denton and McKinney will, thankfully, be the stoppers which inadvertantly make the core job centers much more attractive.

JBB
22 September 2003, 12:35 PM
How far can we go? Looks like Denison and Ardmore before long. :rolleyes:

mikedsjr
22 September 2003, 01:55 PM
The funny thing is that I've known of many people move north to escape the city.

And now the city is following them. silly people.

dallastophoenix
22 September 2003, 07:07 PM
ha! My mom tried to escape the busy city life when she bought acreage in Royse City (10 mins. east of Rockwall) 5 years ago. Now a 1200 home community is planned next door... Prosper has been in the running to get the next growth for some time (friends bought land out there 8 years ago - extremely cheap - knowing that it was going to be the next Mckinney). Now I just wish I would have listened to their investment decision and done the same!

freewaytincan
23 September 2003, 02:19 AM
Originally posted by dallastophoenix
ha! My mom tried to escape the busy city life when she bought acreage in Royse City (10 mins. east of Rockwall) 5 years ago. Now a 1200 home community is planned next door... Prosper has been in the running to get the next growth for some time (friends bought land out there 8 years ago - extremely cheap - knowing that it was going to be the next Mckinney). Now I just wish I would have listened to their investment decision and done the same!

Well, not to be insensitive ot anyone's family, but anyone who would try to "escape the city" by pulling a move like that deserves whatever fate awaits them. I feel no pain for the whiners in Frisco when the empty field behind them goes up into a corporate campus and a bunch of houses. They should be ready for it. They don't like change unless they can control it. Heh, if only they knew...

bloodandpopcorn
23 September 2003, 08:50 AM
I agree, to an extent, but it's more than just the residents. We're loosing valuble open land. We're allowing more sprawl. I'd be much happier if someone could take a 10-30 min drive from the CBD in any direction and be out somewhere peaceful and solitary. If all of the development were brought in, compacted and made uber-urban, we'd be much better off and so would the land and familys that live in these subrban areas that are being taken over by concrete sprawl. But you're right, those who flea Dallas not to 'get away' but to simply buy a cheap house and commute 1-2 hours a day do disgust me in many ways.

mikedsjr
23 September 2003, 10:22 AM
B&P,

Sprawl is my biggest concern too. There should be some sort of incentive for people to live closer to Dallas and Fort Worth and also a requirement for Cities to have Open Space requirements in cities over 30-40,000.

gc
23 September 2003, 11:03 AM
agreed.

aceplace
23 September 2003, 02:52 PM
Mikedsjr,

You wrote


...also a requirement for Cities to have Open Space requirements in cities over 30-40,000

If a municipality is forced to have open space, then that will make the sprawl worse, and expand the area of urbanization farther out.

We'll end up like the San Francisco Bay Area where low density residential occupies the land and cheesy little WWII era houses cost half a million dollars.

Also if you put a population limit on a municipal government, the developers will easily circumvent it by creating several small municipalities instead of a few big ones.

aceplace
23 September 2003, 02:57 PM
Blood, you wrote...


We're loosing valuble open land. We're allowing more sprawl

Do we lose more land by packing people in and around Dallas, or by spreading them evenly over Eastern Texas?

By allowing semi-urban settlement around Dallas, we're protecting areas of Texas farther out from uncontrolled human depradation. How despoiled would the landscape be if we had millions of tenant farmers trying to scratch a living, dust bowl style, out of 40 acres of Central Texas, instead of living near enough to Dallas to work at an urban job?

Just a contrarian thought...

gc
23 September 2003, 03:15 PM
Dang aceplace, you are gettin deep all over the place. I have to think too much to respond to your posts while at work! Keep it up though, i like the perspective!

aceplace
23 September 2003, 05:25 PM
Folks, I did some quick calculations and I came up with this observation...

Let's say DFW has 5 million people and the average density is 5,000 people per square mile... pretty sprawled, actually.

How much space would that take? Assume that the area of settlement is circular, from downtown Dallas, just to keep the math simple.

5 Million people would occupy a disk with a radius of 22 miles, or a blob 44 miles across.

Now assume the DFW population doubles, to 10 million. We're bigger than Chicago. How much more space is taken?

Actually, the radius extends out only another - 9 - miles. The blob is only 18 miles wider.

Let's double the population again. Dallas is now the size of New York at, say, 20 million people. The radius only extends another 14 miles, for a radius of 45 miles.

That means that a New-York sized Metroplex with Dallas' population density extends only to the Northern Collin county line... only halfway to the Red River. The other half only goes as far south as Hillsboro, just past the point where I35E and I35W come together.

Look at it another way... you could fit the current population of Texas into a Metroplex with a 45 mile radius. The rest of Texas would be entirely uninhabited.

Is that kind of suburbal sprawl OK with everybody?

One small hitch. The current population of Texas is 21 million, not 20. So we just raise the population density of central Dallas to look like Manhattan's.

aceplace
23 September 2003, 05:53 PM
Does 5,000 people per square mile constitute horrible crowding? I don't think so.

One square mile contains 27, 878, 400 square feet. Divide that by 5,000 people and there is 5576 square feet for each man, woman and child. How big is that? Each person would have a square about 75 feet on a side.

Of course that is the total land area. Subtract about 10 feet for city streets, another 20 feet for shops, schools, etc, and the square is now 45 by 70 per person.

Think about it. A one bedroom apartment takes about 8 or 900 square feet, or 20 by 45. A family of 4 would have an allowance of 90 by 140 square feet, lots of land.

So doubling the AVERAGE density, say to 10,000 per square, would not be a stringent burden.

Does every suburban house really need a front yard?

gc
23 September 2003, 06:01 PM
good points ace.....and great scenario .....