Reply With Quote/\ Same here. with luck they will use this as an opportunity to funnel foot traffic along the retail strip... it seems like for a lot of night time events they could use the parking in the office buildings.
^Amen.
/\ Same here. with luck they will use this as an opportunity to funnel foot traffic along the retail strip... it seems like for a lot of night time events they could use the parking in the office buildings.
I see eliminating surface lots as a good thing. I thought it was.
RAIN! To....much.....rain.....
This apartment development on Lot F will also connect the new tower across the freeway in LOL to Victory and with some pedestrian improvements and landscaping this will all be walkable and connect multiple living units around Victory and connect to the Katy trail and the Dart station. I say the more lots that get developed the better and as far as parking, those people coming from other areas of the metro can use the train to get to events.
About a month ago I saw a truck drilling / taking soil samples and I was wondering what was going on. Sounds like good news!
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/c...apartments.ece
Camden Property to build Victory Park apartments
Camden Property Trust is negotiating to purchase the 6-acre parking lot just north of American Airlines Center, property brokers say.
The property owner, Hillwood Investments, said last week that it will soon move the parking there to make way for the apartment construction...
The proposed Camden project has the potential to be the largest residential development so far in Victory Park. The 224-unit Vista apartments and the 252-unit Cirque rental high-rise are almost fully leased.
And developer Mill Creek Residential Trust is expected to break ground sometime this summer on a 378-unit apartment project next door to the Victory Park rail station.
Last edited by lakewoodhobo; 21 March 2012 at 08:23 AM.
Such variety in their developments. Hopefully this is worthy of such a visible sight. Not only visible from I-35e but nationally visible on every broadcast from the AAC.
Update about this project sneaked in a blog post about expanding the Victory TIF to West Dallas.
http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/a...l-looks-t.html
When it comes to using funds from Victory, City Hall has another, more pressing problem than West Dallas anyway - parking at the AAC.
There are acres and acres of surface parking lots at Victory that could be developed. But the arena needs parking for games and other events.
Steve Brown reported just a few days ago on tussle between Ross Perot Jr.'s Hillwood and the AAC's operating company over Hillwood's intention to sell a 6-acre parking lot next to the arena for development.
Hillwood has signaled it is agreeable to a delay. But short-term delays won't solve the parking problem City Hall faces with the arena.
Stundins said the TIF could help fund a structured parking lot of 1,200-1,300 spaces. That would amount to phase one of a plan to free up about 20 acres of developable land around the arena.
But nothing is certain.
"The process of converting the surface parking into structured parking has not been completely amiable among the parties," Stundins said.
^There was another one of the DMN blogs that mentioned something about how since AAC debt was paid off early, TIF money could be available for a large public parking garage....
This situation is why the idea that athletic centers support vibrancy and urban life does not wash. We have a train station accessible by commuter and light rail and still we do not have enough parking. Consequently we created empty acres around the center that cuts off the center from the rest of whatever city it is. Yes, the facilities do create activity at the center. We keep blaming Mr. Perot for why that activity does not move outward when the whole concept is faulty.
So you are going to blame the AAC Victory not being vibrant and urban? Never mind that the developer put all that parking around the facility so people never felt like they had to use the train or that DART now covers twice as much of the Dallas Region as it did when the facility was built. I don't agree. But i do agree/believe that no Athletic facility can be a qick fix to create an urban environment overnight.
Blaming the AAC would be like faulting a starting guard in the NFL for not qualifying for the Boston Marathon. You would be giving him a task that he had no business doing. The fault is with the people that created the expectations without any foundation.
what is the problem with a large public garage? 1200 spaces is not a huge garage and could even have development built over it.
People will still go to the game on the train if you eliminate parking they are like water and always take the easiest route. So if there is no parking the next easiest route is the train other than living down there. I hope they build out all of this area so there is hardly any parking and you mostly have to take the train.
Wasn't this development planned to be this way in the first place? What was the idea for parking when all of the renderings of a filled up Victory Park were out?
That was the plan yes when Hillwood was in charge of developing all the land in the area and they had a plan for how to phase in structured parking as they developed. Now Hillwood only cares to sell the land to other developers and count their profits. Also keep in mind that unlike before there is a couple of different land/property owners in Victory Park so the city is taking the lead on the events parking planning to make it as easy as possible for future development.Originally Posted by rantanamo
Last edited by cowboyeagle05; 21 March 2012 at 06:44 PM.
They're expensive. And cars would only park there during games and concerts, so it'd be difficult to recoup those costs. In that sense, I can understand why someone would rather maintain a surface lot or sell the property for apartments.
But if there were a development atop the garage...
...then there'd a consistent source of revenue for whoever built the garage. Plus, the garage builder could even add street-level retail--or offer contract parking for nearby offices.
The more I think about it, the more I like this idea. I just wish I had several million dollars in working capital, and it'd be mine! (Or we could share it.)
I keep reading the word expensive. Number? And they could charge to park there 24x7. Hence the word public. Not a new idea. Even building one with ground floor retail is not new. Of course a plain lot is cheap, that doesn't mean it isn't a worthwhile investment to build a garage. Otherwise, what are they gonna do when Camden starts building? The spots will simply be lost and poof no parking spaces.
I read once (and I couldn't tell you where) that it costs eight times as much, per space, to build a parking garage than surface lots. That number seems high, but it also seems reasonable. And I suppose it's not because it's "expensive" to build the garage; instead it's cheap to build a surface lot.
But that really wasn't the point of my post. I think a parking garage (or three) is a good idea for Victory Park. I just think it's a tough sell without a plan for regular, daytime revenue (e.g. a development atop or nearby office buildings). And I think the market would support such a development. I just don't have the funds to back it myself--though I wish I did.
I've heard the numbers for a parking garage cost $10K-20K per space.
Build two parking garages, put ground level retail in them and 4 to 5 floors of apartments on top. Put them where the parking lot is by the DART station and put a cool unique walkway down the middle connecting the station to the center. Can I get a backer?
RAIN! To....much.....rain.....
Usually the way a city does it is the city agrees to pay a developer a bunch of money to add public parking to their overall project. In Downtown Garland the city provided money to a developer to pay for public parking spaces to be added to the High Street Residential Project that built right next to the station so that there would be some 200 additional public parking spots. About 1200+ spaces is a lot of parking spaces to fit into one building and include enough parking for a attached development. The Hall Arts Parking Garage has enough parking for something like 1000+ which is a rather large garage to not have a development on top of it taking up some of those parking spots. Is there a developer who wants to build that kind of high capacity garage into their residential or commercial project in Victory Park right now, cause it does add a whole other level of complexity to a project. Maybe you could get a developer to build the garage now while granting them the right to develop on top of the garage at a later time.
Also whats the story with the Victory Tower garage? I imagine the German Bank owns it but how many spaces and how much would it cost to finish that garage and build out the retail space the garage was supposed to have along Victory Park Lane.
backed hard
I swear. If we all got together and had a blind invester who let us plan out this stuff and do what we told them to do, i think the city would look much better. It would be like the Ultimate Sim City: Dallas!
RAIN! To....much.....rain.....
My cities always got destroyed by aliens...
I like the idea, generally, but I have a few questions/reservations. Does anyone know how tall the AAC is? (Wikipedia didn't.) The reason: It seems both a shame--and a potential violation of AMR's agreement--to block the facade from the roadway/train. I know there's the LED board on the far north end, but shouldn't it be almost painfully obvious there's a world-class arena in the neighborhood to all passersby?
I kinda think it would be cool and "urban" to have it tucked away in a neighborhood
Well older stadiums and arenas are, in a way, hidden within a neighborhood. I don't think it would be bad to block the facade from Stemmons/DART Rail; the streets will always allow people to view the middle of each side of the AAC. It's not like people don't know it's there.
That's true. And I like those old stadia. But at least the outdoor ones have tall, distinctive lights (or foul polls, or whatnot). With an arena, it's a little harder to detect.
And sure, everyone in DFW knows the AAC is there. But what about the out-of-towners who travel on I-35 or DART rail. They probably "know" it's there too. But it'd be nice to have a "guidepost."
Really, I'm ambivalent on "blocking" the facade. It's just something to think about.
I hope the developers keep that in mind.
why build in an urban area if you are worried about it being blocked? They could have built it next to Stemmons but they chose not to. Strange how this was a masterplanned neighborhood, but no one seems to want to go through with finishing out the area.
FAA: https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...eCaseID=296307
139 FT
I think the signs on streets with arrows pointing to the AAC are good enough. thats how I found it my first time in Dallas before moving.
RAIN! To....much.....rain.....
Cool. That's about 50' taller than I would've guessed. (And thanks! I didn't know the FAA published that.)
So it sounds like a "mid-rise" structure (parking, residential, or otherwise) might "block" the facade--but one would still know something was there, behind it. Sounds like a decent compromise to me.
I would be fine with more buildings like the 2 that create AT&T Plaza in front of the AAC with parking below grade. that way the top of the AAC is still visible with the large AA Logo.
RAIN! To....much.....rain.....
I was really guessing 90-100 feet. But, it was allowed to go 139' so I suppose that's the height at which it was constructed. Not including antennae and whatnot.
It's funny, before I decided to drill down with lat/long to refine the sifting of the archived data - I ran across a feasibility study for 700' that year (1999) for the Museum Tower site also. Or maybe it was plus/minus a year since I checked multiple years just to be sure. . . Checks with chart for that timeframe, sort of. . .
I think there's not too much to be concerned about regarding view corridors and the general stumbling upon the arena from a non-view corridor street blocks away. Especially considering the multiple "master plans from which to deviate" over the last decade (+) have suggested far more intense burying of the arena within the "neighborhood". Just thinking aloud. . .
Last edited by CTroyMathis; 24 March 2012 at 02:52 PM.
DBJ: Hillwood, American Airlines Center parking saga continues
Hillwood also claimed Center Operating Co. was going to raise rate for playoff parking, which Center Operating Co. denies.
In a statement, Hillwood said, "We remain hopeful that Center Operating Co. will drop its new demands, which would keep the lot available for Mavericks and Stars fans through the end of the playoffs at rates set by Center Operating Co. Otherwise, while we do not have a date certain for closure of the lot, it could occur before the end of the playoffs, depending primarily on what Center Operating Co. decides."
Center Operating Co. released a statement Thursday afternoon saying that Hillwood's statement is false and that the company is in favor of development in Victory Park.
..."It's hard to imagine that the contract could be signed, financed, closed and construction begun as soon as mid-April."
so I guess the 139 ft eliminates it from the being the 17 story rendering behind the paywall in the DMN right now.
Don't worry rantanamo, we will have another tower soon, that 17-story rendering is for a residential/apartment building at 3100 Carlisle at Bowen in uptown.
This property is actually fenced and demo work already started inside the 2 buildings.
Last edited by Julien; 06 April 2012 at 03:37 PM.
I'm pretty sure that has already been confirmed as 6 stories.
That's right for the lot F, I was talking about that 17-story rendering rantanamo was referring to in the DMN. I know this info should be in another thread, I am sorry if it brought any confusion.
No, I'm pretty sure the Carlisle site has been confirmed as 6 stories as well.
3103 Carlisle on the katy trail should be 6-story residential (+ 3-story parking)
From this DMN article: http://www.dallasnews.com/business/c...t-proposed.ece
The 17-story rendering will replace 3000-3100 Carlisle: http://victorbenvenuto.blogspot.com/...ished-for.htmlBy STEVE BROWN
Real Estate Editor
stevebrown@dallasnews.com
Published: 13 December 2011 10:43 AM
Developers want to replace an aging Uptown office complex with a new apartment building.
The 9-story residential project would be constructed on Carlisle Street adjacent to the Katy Trail.
Property owner Alamo Manhattan Carlisle LLC is asking approval from the City of Dallas to build 200-apartments in the project, which would include six floors of residential space on top of a 3-level parking garage...
...The two buildings Alamo Manhattan Carlisle owns at 3103 Carlisle were built in the 1970s.
Which thread has the 17-story rendering?
edit: never mind... found it.
"I need no warrant for being, and no word of sanction upon my being. I am the warrant and the sanction."
I suppose this update of possible new parking garages applies to a lot more than just development. Not sure if this should be in City Issues + News.
NBCDFW.COM: AAC Parking, West Dallas Art Part of the Same Dallas City Hall Deal
Dallas city leaders Monday endorsed a plan to join the American Airlines Center and West Dallas in the same tax increment finance district. The expanded Sports Arena Tax Increment Finance District could provide a list of improvements from two new parking garages for Mavericks fans to art that might beautify power lines in West Dallas.The parking garages would replace surface parking lots so private property owners could use those sites for more large buildings. The expanded boundaries of the district also would allow wealth from the arena area to support West Dallas development on the other side of the Trinity River across the new Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge. One suggested use of TIF money in West Dallas is a screen of some sort to conceal a power substation at the base of the bridge at Singleton Boulevard and Beckley Avenue.
From the look of their graphic it appears as if one is a new structure and the other is an expansion of the existing one at Victory Tower/Mandarin Oriental. Also, it's funny that they interview the fans but not the business owners who would benefit the most from new development.
Last edited by lakewoodhobo; 01 May 2012 at 11:11 AM.
I imagine the Victory Tower RIP garage should be the first to get fixed since it was designed to be built much taller with multiple floors of parking. This will also allow the city to finish out the retail space that was supposed to be built on the first floor of the garage facing Victory Park Lane. Since Victory Park is getting more residential development building additional retail space for any number of businesses neighborhood oriented and/or event oriented would lease up without as much struggle as when the project failed for the first time. Allow a mix of cleaners, neighborhood bars, hair salons, restaurants, boutique shopping, galleries, etc and the neighborhood will be more stable and function on its own to attract even more development.
It is sad to think that the city might build more parking garage over the tower foundation site though. I would hope that the new owners would want to build something there eventually even if it weren't as tall as the previous project.
At least cover the garages with some of that landscaping like what they have been doing in Mexico City with their Vertical Gardens. They add a lot of color to those boring garage facades and also clean the polluted air that cars produce. Apparently Mexico City has been installing these kind of things all over the city and has been able to reduce the amount of air pollution found in the city center.
verticalgardentitle.jpg
All good points about the new resurgence of Victory Park with all of the new residential components going in that should help drive growth of retail.
Question concerning your last comment - I believe the Mandarin Oriental's parking garage was actually incorporated into the bottom levels of the appoximately 700 foot tall Mandarin skyscraper from the outset, correct?
So if they build up the parking garage that was originally to serve the Mandarin skyscraper to its original planned height, it would seem that the foundation already laid for it all would still support a skyscraper there of the original intent and height of around 700 feet. I think the Mandarin parking garage would have been covered in cladding to conceal it, much like what has been done on several of the skyscrapers in Uptown such as St. Anne's.
Yeah it was planned to be incorporated but I believe the support structure for the tower was never built and would have been built where the valet lot that fronts Olive Street is located. It was to be about 6 floors of parking attached to the tower with most likely some sort of green roof and hard material cladding. My suggestion was merely to try to preserve some sort of flexibility to allow a tower to be built later on if not now. Maybe make it a plaza, more food trucks?, instead of valet parking like it is now and add as many levels to that garage that they need to meet the numbers for parking spots. Also change up the design to incorporate green aspects to make the garage even more green since it would be some sort of city funded project incorporating these green vertical gardens works to clean our air. What a better way for the city to set a standard in garage environmental design for the region and make an impact in two ways rather than one.
Arena parking fuss settled
By: Steve Brown / Real Estate Editor
5:30 PM on Tue., May. 1, 2012
Officials with the sports arena near downtown Dallas said Tuesday they have reached an agreement to allow parking on the lot just north of the building to continue until the end of June. Hillwood in March said that it would be shutting most of the "F" parking lot soon to make way for a new apartment development.
After some back and forth, the parties seem to have agreed to keep the lot open until June 30.
"The deal will be in place until that time, unless Hillwood completes the final sale of the property that is owned by Hillwood before that date," arena operators said in a statement Tuesday.
The F lot is under contract to Houston-based apartment developer Camden Property Trust which plans to build a rental housing community on the land.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks