Reply With QuotePerot Jr. said that a couple major relocations should occur wihtin the next year or so with about 10 more in the next decade or so. Most I presume would be moving in from the burbs.
The footprint isn't that small. The smaller one is the petroleum. Of the block the two take up, the Corrigane has 2/3 of the space. The Tower has the smaller portion.Originally Posted by tamtagon
Why do other properties have to be redone? It's backside has Pacific Place, the Majestic and the Hart Furniture Building. The front side is 1700 Pacific. It left is 1900 Elm, UCD and the Aristocrat. To the front left is the Bank One Center. It front right is the Republic Center and its immediate right is that surface lot. In terms of usable buildings, this is one of the most complete stretches in DTD. There are about 190 floors of office in the one block radius, 358 residential units, a theatre, a club (albeit it is Club Blue), lots of available street front retail, and (sigh) a connection to the skywalk and less than one block away in two directions are access points to the tunnel system. If/When the park gets build in that surface lot, there should be no reason that this building doesn't get itself done based on those merits.
That is a lot of daytime population to help the storefronts (though only 22 of the 190 or so floors I listed don't connect to the tunnels, which will hurt topside retail), a burgeoning residential pop nearby, with a total of 883 units in the two block vicinity when the Merc gets done, two parks within those two blocks, a post office and a rail station. This is prime property now, and could be done IMHO.
BTW, I should have mentioned that another reason I can't support this is because I don't believe we need more hotel rooms. A conversion I don't oppose, but I think a new hotel, with the Magnolia, Joule, Adam's Mark, Aristocrat, Hyatt, Hampton Inn, Springhill Suites and what the other ones I couldn't think of off the top of my head in downtown would be too much, when vacancy rates are at 54%.
My guess is it would be about 4 mil, if most or all of it going to asbestos abatement.It would be really nice to know how much of the $12 million TIF request would go to the Tower Petroleum Building.
Agreed. No tear downs unless all the ducks are in a row. Any tear down with a rebuild is better than any teardown for a surface lot.Word
&
Show me the Money
Perot Jr. said that a couple major relocations should occur wihtin the next year or so with about 10 more in the next decade or so. Most I presume would be moving in from the burbs.
No problem, thanks for the compliment.
From what I know, most of the TIF funds are for the Petroleum exterior and lobby renovation. What is left could be applied to the demolition but their justification for the funds was for petroleum tower.
Regarding the footprint of the two buildings Tower Petroleum does have the smaller footprint but there are building setback requirements on the back side of the Tower Petroleum since is has windows on the back side as well. This means that the 1900 building site is Very small.
The need for hotels in the downtown market actually is larger than you think. Dallas is a central location for a lot of nationwide businesses and conventions. We can never find a hotel room for clients when there is a convention in town which is quite often.
I've personally questioned if a residential tower in this part of town will work. It is close to the Arts district which is expanding but beyond that there is not much going on in that part of town. The client really is relying on the park to be built across the street, without that I really don't see this area to be marketable yet.
Copied from the Corrigan Tower thread:
The total TIF request is for $12 million and if most of the amount goes toward Tower Petroleum, that's a done deal for me.
If rennovated, the Tower Petroleum Building (the Tower Tower) will become a boutique hotel, an important distinction from the big, 500+ room hotels like Adams Mark, Hyatt, Anatole, etc. This segment of the hotel industry seems to be just now taking shape in Dallas. Joule and Palomar have great resumes contributing to their future, and ZaZa is a proven success. I think it's essential to the 'city' atmosphere growing back in the CBD that a good number of boutique hotel are available.
I live right there, and of the 129 units, it is leased usually around 95%. And as I pointed out earlier, one block away is another 229 units. 359 units surround this block.
This has bothered me for some time. I have looked into the buildings and have found some things that made me wonder about this.
First, the footprint of this building is almost twice as large as the Tower. I took two sepearte informal measurements when I walked by it I took pace measurements. The first time, from the edge of the building to the edge of the skywalk, it was 46 paces. The second time it was 44. Then I walked under the skywalk to the Tower and did the same. The first time it was 24 and the second was 22. Either way the Corrigan is almost 2/3 bigger in the footprint.
Second, Corrigan is 17 stories tall and has 215,000 square feet of floor space. The Tower is 22 stories tall and has 110,000 sq ft. They both back up to Pacific Place, so the legnth along the east/west border is the same. The Corrigan averages 12,647 sq ft per floor. The Tower averages 5,000. That means the Corrigan is already twice as large.
Third, there is currently a skywalk's worth of distance between the two towers, meaning there is already some distance between the towers. The Tower basically already touches Pacific Place behind it, so there is no setback there.
Fate of tower projects linked with violence at troubled nightspot
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...e.237c2aa.html
09:50 PM CDT on Saturday, September 30, 2006
By DAVE LEVINTHAL / The Dallas Morning News
Under way on the streets of downtown Dallas is a multimillion dollar game of chicken the likes of which the center city has never seen.
Rita Sweeney envisions a gleaming condominium tower soaring higher than many of Dallas' tallest buildings in a section of downtown still reeling from last decade's real estate bust.
And the Dallas investor wants $12 million in public tax incentives to help develop the proposed 52-story high-rise and renovate the adjacent Tower Petroleum Building into a hotel.
But despite City Hall's seemingly insatiable appetite for downtown development – and its willingness to provide tax incentives to most anyone willing to gamble on the center city – some City Council members say they're not yet interested in Ms. Sweeney's proposal.
Her most recent redevelopment project, the Hart Furniture Building on Elm Street that houses mega-nightclub Blue, is a dangerous blight on an otherwise rebounding downtown, some council members say. The city gave Ms. Sweeney more than $1 million in tax increment financing funds to rehabilitate the deteriorating structure.
So until Ms. Sweeney orders tenant Blue to satisfy a list of conditions – banning cellphones, installing metal detectors, increasing security, outlawing glass containers and requiring all patrons to be at least 21 – she can build her new Tower Residences and hotel project herself, without taxpayers' help, the council members say.
Mayor Laura Miller goes further.
"They didn't perform. They promised a fine dining restaurant and didn't deliver. They created the worst crime-generating project in downtown right now," Ms. Miller said. "I don't think the Sweeneys should get one red cent for anything they do now or in the future."
And if that means risking the construction of a $116 million project, as Ms. Sweeney says it will?
"So be it," Ms. Miller said.
Crime issues
Ms. Sweeney says city officials have unfairly vilified Blue when, if anything, the club each year draws tens of thousands of revelers to downtown who wouldn't otherwise visit.
She said any large nightclub will invariably experience crime issues, but Blue has taken "extraordinary measures" to mitigate them, from hiring off-duty Dallas police officers to searching club patrons upon entry. Most crimes the city attributes to Blue actually occur blocks away from the club, either on public streets or in parking lots Blue doesn't own, she contended.
Besides, Ms. Sweeney added, the city knew from the start that a large nightclub would be operating within the Hart Furniture Building on Harwood Street and Pacific Avenue when it offered public tax increment financing incentives to help rehabilitate the building.
Now, the fate of potentially the tallest building to be built downtown in a generation should not hinge on false perceptions of an unrelated development, she said.
"If they didn't want a nightclub in this building, that's all they had to say, and it would have been toast," Ms. Sweeney argued. "Now the city wants us to patrol lots we don't own – something we can't legally do. And if something happens in parking lots, even if it's blocks away, they attribute it to this club.
"The city is taking a very short-sighted approach to this," she added. "They're holding back a $100 million development – for what?"
Blue owner Keith Black said the city's displeasure with Blue, which opened three years ago, goes beyond perceptions of crime.
"Because our clientele is predominantly African-American, Hispanic and Asian, that doesn't fit in the model they have for downtown Dallas," Mr. Black said. "They should look at us as a success story in downtown Dallas. You're safer in club Blue than you are walking on the street in the city of Dallas."
Ms. Miller says race is not a factor in city officials' opinion of Blue.
"Bottom line, club Blue is clearly the most problematic club I have in my division," Dallas Deputy Police Chief Brian Harvey said.
Between 80 percent and 85 percent of his division officers will be directed to the area around Blue during early mornings that the club is operating, he said.
The most significant problem, said Chief Harvey: Blue allowing patrons 18- to 20-years old into the club. Numerous incidents in and around Blue involve underage patrons of the club, he said.
"They end up drinking, and they don't have the emotional maturity to handle the social situation," Chief Harvey said.
Hotel-condo project
Built in 1931, the Tower Petroleum Building is a monument to prewar, art deco architecture. While it once was a focal point of downtown, it now sits amid a cluster of half-empty and empty buildings whose heyday passed long ago.
Renovating the Tower Petroleum Building into a 140-unit luxury hotel would cost $18.1 million in private investments, Ms. Sweeney estimated. A hotel operator must be announced within six months of the council authorizing a development agreement for the project, and the building must contain retail space, according to terms the city and the Sweeneys have already negotiated.
The proposed condominium tower at 1900 Pacific Ave. would cost $86.2 million in private funds to build, according to project figures.
Ms. Sweeney estimated that it would take 12 months from the date of the council approving tax subsidies to design and develop the two buildings and another 24 to 36 months to construct them.
As is stands today, the council's economic development and housing committee has declined to recommend offering $12 million in public tax increment financing funds to Ms. Sweeney and her business partner and husband, Lawrence, until they meet the crime-abatement conditions the city has set forth for Blue.
In February, the council also approved a historic tax abatement estimated at $2.88 million for the Tower Petroleum Building, contingent on Ms. Sweeney negotiating with city staff an operating plan for the Hart Furniture Building. Such a plan has not been established.
Despite their misgivings about Blue, some city officials are working privately to broker a resolution that at once addresses concerns at the club and saves the hotel and condominium project.
"The Sweeneys are good developers, and at the end of the day, we will have a great new development and a safe nightclub that doesn't cause public safety problems for downtown," said council member Angela Hunt, whose District 14 includes Blue and the land on which the proposed hotel/condominium project would be built.
'Dynamic' project
Calling the hotel/condominium project "dynamic and worthwhile," Dallas Office of Economic Development director Karl Zavitkovsky said continuing negotiations with the developers are proving fruitful.
"I'm sure not going to declare victory yet. But I feel optimistic. I don't see this as an either/or proposition. All interests can be served," Mr. Zavitkovsky said.
Asked if the council has ever tied the past performance of one developer's publicly subsidized project to providing tax incentives for another, unrelated project, Mr. Zavitkovsky said he did not believe so.
"Both sides have merit, but the city's interests always trump," said Larry Hamilton, a Dallas developer who's received city money to convert old office buildings into residential space. "The City Council isn't obligated to give subsidies, so if I had a tenant who the city considered a nuisance, I'd do everything I can to clean it up."
There's no easy solution to this situation, said Peter Armato, president and chief executive officer of Downtown Dallas, which represents center city business interests. But it's worth it to the health of downtown commerce for both the city and the Sweeneys to reach a compromise.
"The City Council is using appropriate leverage. The Sweeneys have a very good point," Mr. Armato said. "I hope they'll work it out."
'A nightmare'
As far as Ms. Miller is concerned, "I want nothing better than to see that club go away. It's just been a nightmare."
The mayor says she's particularly disturbed that the Sweeneys told the council they'd house a top-flight restaurant alongside Blue in the Hart Furniture Building. But no such restaurant materialized. Ms. Sweeney says market conditions downtown would cause a fine dining restaurant to fail.
In part because of the Hart Furniture Building experience, the mayor said she doubts Ms. Sweeney is even qualified to complete a hotel/condominium project of the magnitude planned.
Ms. Sweeney says she's qualified and plans to continue working with city officials. But she says she's unwilling to tell Blue operator Mr. Black, her tenant, how to run his operation. That includes telling him to ban people under 21, she said.
"They're trying to put him out of business, and they're trying to force me to put him out of business," Ms. Sweeney said. "When people haven't done anything wrong, I, in principle, won't put him out of business, even if it means not doing Tower Petroleum."
E-mail dlevinthal@dallasnews.com
Last edited by Tnekster; 01 October 2006 at 12:18 AM.
Not having cellphones in a club as a rule? What kind of garbage is that? I can see making sure it's safe, but that's ridiculous.
LM is going to cost us a ton of money in a City lawsuit with this one.
Last edited by UrbanHope; 01 October 2006 at 10:22 AM.
Founder of dallasprogress.blogspot.com/
Ummmm.... stop giving LM all the blame when it comes to deals that don't work out. First it was the Cowboys Stadium you guys blame her for which was a whole series of groups County Officials, city staff, state senators that all said it was bad deal. Then the entertainment complex which the city staff and council said they would sign a deal only if the developer produced the financial backing which after extension and extension of the deadline by the city the developer failed to produce its credientials. Now this tower, I like almost everyone else wants to see a 52 story tower built downtown, but council members (not just LM) city staffers etc. are saying they will not back it because the developer has yet to produce its restuarant in the Hart buildng and the crime associated with the club. LM is not the lone person here, re-read the article. Just from personal experience I went to that club when it first opened on a Happy Hour event. At that time I believe it was 21 and up. The club operator is notorious for developing clubs that open to a "safe" environment but as time goes on usually with in a year the establishment goes downhill. Criminal activity or violence outside the club goes up and the club goes downhill in hurry. Unfortuently it is mostly associated with the cliental. Why is it that Prugatory within close proximety and open for over a year does not have these issues, and the clubs in Deep Ellum don't either which have been there for YEARS? But Blue has been there for what 3 years now and the past 2 years we have seen reports of fights inside and outside the club, routy behavior in the immediate adjacent parking lots where the patrons park and so on. Down the road we have Angel's or whatever where the lunch buffet is good, but the night scene turns to violence. Remember the shootings and the continous reports of violence. Not exactly what we need downtown. Now in all fairness we also don't need the disruptive behavior we have scene in recent months around the Stone Street gardens at 1am. There has also been far less incidents in that area then Blue or Angel's. It really has to do with the operator of the club and how he/she enforces the rules.
Just like Angela Hunt mentioned her blog, we do not need to keep saying yes to stuff that says easy money.... We do not need to hand out money in incentives for anything that sounds awesome for downtown. 12 mil is alot to hand out w/o some caution.
Last edited by slfunk; 01 October 2006 at 03:33 PM.
Number one, I agree with slfunk. This is a city position, not a mayor position.
Number two, what's to sue? Not being a legal expert, I may not be clear but I don't think the developer has a right to public subsidy. Most tax breaks are based on the developer completing some requirement. In this case, it is decreasing crime. And as a guy who lives a block away from Blue, it needs it. That place makes me nervous, and I don't get nervous easy. As mentioned, this isn't a club causes crime thing. This is a this club causes a crime. And in this case, this developer does not deserve another subsidy. Blue has hurt DTD more than it has helped.
More numbers. The Merc is the most expensive subsidy given by the City for Downtown redevelopment. $70.5 million to convert the Merc into 225 units, demolished around 800,000 square feet of asbestos laiden obsolete office buildings, build a new apartment tower with 150 units, conversion of the Continental Building to 150 for-purchase condos of which the city gets a portion of the sales revenue, and conversion of the Atmos Complex to 269 units. In total, that $70.5 will bring 794 new units, or an average of 11.3 new units per million.
This demolition/construction will bring roughly 130 new units. That's an average of 10.8 new units per million.
Okay, here are the hidden numbers behind the subsidy.
The Merc deal will take off 1,676,915 square feet of vacant office space, along with 2 and a half blocks of dead zone in downtown. There will also be new retail space and when the City gets the portion of the condo sales, the subsidy actually lowers further.
Now it can also be debated, but the Merc is also a more historic structure and more symbolic of the downturn of the economy in the late '80's and the crash of downtown. Therefore, it is also a symbol of its rebirth.
Now this new deal also includes a 140 unit luxury hotel that may or may not be needed in the market about to introduce a lot of new luxury hotel units to the core. All told, only 325,000 square feet of obsolete comes off the vacant list, with some retail as well. All told, this is not even a half of block, in a semi-vibrant area of DTD, with a 20-story office building (Pacific Place) and the Majestic within the same block, along with Club Blue and the vacant restaurant space this developer promised but didn't deliver.
Along with it, they will demolish a structure that has some historical value. While not as historic as the Merc, it was still built in 1951, at a time when Downtown couldn't build office buildings fast enough.
I don't want this to seem like an either-or, but it seems like this deal has no where near the value that the Merc deal has. Now if there was an outcry over the Merc deal, there should be one here as well, as the return on investment is a lot lower.
delete: duplicate post
Last edited by FoUTASportscaster; 02 October 2006 at 12:13 AM. Reason: duplicate post
delete: duplicate post
Last edited by FoUTASportscaster; 02 October 2006 at 12:13 AM. Reason: duplicate post
delete: duplicate post
Last edited by FoUTASportscaster; 02 October 2006 at 12:14 AM. Reason: duplicate post
delete: duplicate post
Last edited by FoUTASportscaster; 02 October 2006 at 12:15 AM. Reason: duplicate post
FO, I meant Club Blue suing the city. I am pretty familiar with this situation since I diid meet with a lot of the principals involved, specifically about downtown crime.
So, do you propose they open the restaurant and end up like....Tarantino's in Deep Ellum?
LM isn't the blame for everything but she's had a hard-on for Club Blue for some time, if it wasn't clear before it was made clear at the Deep Ellum Association meeting last February. Plus, we're not talking all of the other things you mentioned, we're talking about Blue.
If it was all about club safety then why is Club DMX is Northwest Dallas still open and why is Club Escapade still open? How many murders have those two clubs had in the past few years? A cop got killed in the DMX parking lot.
I have been critical of Blue in the past, but I also realize that the owners of the parking lot across from Blue are getting a free ride. Either they should fence off the lot or help provide security. A lot of people don't even go in Blue they just come to hang out in the parking lot.
The parking lot owner has a sweet deal, he gets to increase parking rates on the weekend and make a ton of money but not be responsible for anything that happens.
As I told Deputy Chief Harvey and others, the City has to give a little and the owners of Club Blue have to give a little. In the end, I think the deal will get done. If not now, then in June 2007.
Founder of dallasprogress.blogspot.com/
Again, this isn't LaMi speaking against Club Blue. This is the City and residents, like me, speaking against Club Blue. I have signed a petition concerning Blue. There could be other reason, like the lot owner, but things like the 21 and up could easily be enforced to make it safer for residents like me.
But bottomline, the City, the mayor AND the council, aren't doing anything to stop Blue. They simply said if you want this subsidy, do something about the crime and other problems that stem from Blue.
We were promised an upscale club, and got this. The guy has a history of doing this, so don't blame anyone but the owner. It's about money and nothing else.
Just because people who don't look like you go to the club does not mean that it's not upscale. Have you been inside it?
Times weighs down on you like an old, ambiguous dream. You keep on moving, trying to slip through it. But even if you go to the ends of the earth, you won't be able to escape it.
Haruki Murakami
If they simply raise the minimum age to 21 that will solve the problems around Blue.
What about the parking lot that's NOT owned by Blue?
Founder of dallasprogress.blogspot.com/
Well that is another issue and that maybe you should bring up with the council. The fact of the matter is that if club blue were out of business then that parking lot would be vertually empty. When that club first opened it was upscale throughout. The cliental were "yuppies" to the say the least driving around in their "yuppy" cars. Now you go there and the cliental is driving around in something much different. I seriously doubt they would have changed the decor from when it orginally opened to serve its current cliental (because they put A LOT of money in to get that club open). I was walking home from work late one evening on Thursday night and my car was in that parking lot. Guys were running around in a panic to put up fliers of the latest hip hop CD's, car stereo's were blasting, people hanging out in the parking lot, a line starting to form outside the club, and people disregarding all traffic signals flicking off and yelling at cars that had the right-of-way so they could cross the street. I am really not a fan of the club culture anymore. I was when in college, but now I can just see how routy it gets.
But to address the LM thing again, no matter what the issue is at city hall, no matter how much back up the council members give her, you guys LOVE to attack her and blame for every free ride the city does not give to developers. Now after listening in on council meetings, reading my research, it is more than evidently clear Miller does not take a stand on things w/o the facts from her research and other advisors. She typically takes the consensus of the council (unlike many refuse to believe) and advocates that while other council members stay hush hush. Then when something goes wrong in an unfavorable position for a council member he/she starts rime and reason to point blame to LM and throw her under the bus. But the funny thing is many KEEP forgetting she has no more power then anyother person on that council. She is mostly the PR figure. Meanwhile many side with the council members who one are suspected by the FBI for money laundering or are found guilty, and two are the same council members who campaign the LM (who is jewish) is a "racist nazi" and she does nothing for the city. But when something they like comes along and she works to help that council member get it done and passed, those same members (the ones throwing her under the bus) praise her as though she is their best friend. But it is much easier to only remember the "scandalis" and bad media the news takes and runs with. They have a hard time reporting the good (in other words they don't), and how much work she puts in helping the same members that call her a "racist nazi".
Last edited by slfunk; 02 October 2006 at 10:12 AM.
Thanks for lumping me in with everybody that ever disliked Laura Miller.
You don't know a damn thing about who I do and don't support. I tell you what, read my blog and tell me if I'm a big fan of all of the people you allude to in this post. See if I already wrote that the Mayor is mostly the PR person and that the onus to crackdown on crime is up to people on the Council.
When I asked Don Raines of the Downtown Neighbors Association to go in with me and to try to broker a solution on this thing, I didn't even get a callback.
I give credit to Angela Hunt for trying to bring different sides together on this issue. Other Angela and Chief Harvey the city gets an ‘F.’
Months ago, I wrote this on Dallas Progress:
Unfortunately I think that the violence will continue downtown until the downtown groups like Don Raines' organization realize that they can't quell it just by getting more police to come. I'm sure his intentions are good, but they may be better off by getting input from the groups that actually attend these functions. Contrary to public belief, we like to party in peace and also don’t want thugs spoiling our events.
I also wrote:
When the meetings were happening with the Deep Ellum Association and the City in the spring, I met Frank Librio (current Mayor's chief of Staff) and Meranda Carter Cohn (public information officer for the Mayor). We had some good convo and I mentioned that to really improve the safety and viability of Downtown you must include young Blacks in the process. I got the usual nods and the trading of business cards and promised calls. In addition to e-mail, I left messages for Ms. Cohn on several occasions but never got a response.
And therein lies the problem with this city. The go it alone method does not work. Neither does the "use the same two or three people and put them in the front to feign interest" method. Until Dallas gets it, expect more of the same.
I'm done with this post. Have at it.
Founder of dallasprogress.blogspot.com/
My first paragraph responded to your message about parking. But the second paragraph was triggered by:
and
as well as some other comments that get posted in the same accusatory manor towards Miller from other members. This project is JUST now making news and she is already being laid at fault when it is clearly stated the staff and council are not beind it because of the lack of follow through the developer has shown on its previous promises of the Hart building. I usually keep my mouth shut in the LM debates, but this project is just now surfacing and these type comments will easily be interpretted by others that it must be LM fault. When again she is representing the council's concerns. Its not meant to group you with the haters of LM....sorry you thought that.
Last edited by slfunk; 02 October 2006 at 11:25 AM.
....
Last edited by Boredkid; 09 October 2006 at 08:12 PM.
Why did you have weapons drawn on you? I am not trying to sound naive, but I was wondering if you just accidentally happened to catch a stare or what that provoked it?
Were the people who had the weapons on foot?
How far from Blue did it occur?
Tighten the female dog!
I'm sure it's not what you meant, but one could almost read this as you implying that if you happen to make eye contact with some angry thug, it's your fault when they pull a gun on you.
I don't mean to imply anything. I just wanted to know what may have caused this situation.
And I wouldn't fault the person who just accidentally caught a "stare" which led to having weapons drawn on him.
I used "catching a stare" as an example why some people may (wrongfully) draw weapons.
There are people who get pissed off for all the wrong and the smallest of things.
To repeat, I would like to know the circumstances of the situation.
Tighten the female dog!
Right. That's why I said "I'm sure it's not what you meant, but one could almost read this as...".
....
Last edited by Boredkid; 09 October 2006 at 08:11 PM.
That sucks Boredkid.
But back to Blue, I find it difficult that Club Blue can produce all of this crime. Look at 6th Street in Austin, blocks upon blocks of bars and clubs. And a few DO ALLOW the 18-20. And Sixth does not look like a "bad day in Bosnia". There has to be other causes beyond purely this establishment for crime.
Also, I think the developer of Blue does care about crime in and around DTD. After all they want to spend millions on creating a hotel and condo tower, and they won't attract any buyers or guests if they are the ones causing the crime.
So why make Blue responsible?
Tighten the female dog!
When it comes to Blue I have also had bad experiences there/nearby. In the club I actually never had problems with the patrons but more so with the staff/service, but the last time I was there was probably 2 1/2 years ago. Outside though, I actually called the cops one night (a saturday I believe, this spring) when I was stuck in bumper to bumper grid lock at Elm and Pearl (and when I mean grid lock, I mean grid lock!!) when I heard shots fired to my right (I was heading southbound, so it was towards the area of Blue) but unable to go anywhere. There were more than three vehicles I saw on the road who were drinking open liquor containers, and who knows how many more bottles I saw being drank in the parking lot.
When living in the CBD and now in The Cedars, I will do/did everything possible to stay away from that area, especially after almost being runover while walking back to The Davis from Club 7 on Pacific.
I don't know if I agree with the 18+ thing. I used to go to Village Station all the time when I turned 18 and NEVER noticed any violence, fights (besides the drama queens, which you can hardly call a "fight") or general crimes. I still don't. I'm not going to go deep into this, but I really think it's cultural differences. And don't think I'm trying to say it's a "white thing" or "black thing" cause it's not. There are numerous black people at S4 (formerly Village Station), etc. It's strictly how people were raised and the values that they hold.
As far as the owners responsibility...the owner of Blue can do nothing about the lots and streets surrounding his club if he does not own them, but he can do everything possible inside his club. Which he should. I don't know if they are 18+ every night, but maybe it would help if they only did it on say Tuesdays and Thursdays or something like that.
The proposed development would indeed be a great addition to the neighborhood, downtown and Dallas in general. But a deal is a deal and the developer needs to stick with it. Let's hope that the CITY (not just LM) and the developer can work something out.
Where do these patrons park when attending Blue?
Actually if there any sort of parking agreement with the adjacent lot he does have some responsibilty. (which I am sure he does, because to get a permit for the club he would have had to issue a parking plan to the city. This plan shows how he will supply parking). If he does not..well he does not have responsibility. The parking lot is at Pacific and Harwood across the street from Blue. What a responsible owner would do is help pay for police surveillance (you know those cop-in-a-box above the parking lot). It really is this guys patrons that are causing the problems, and he should be helping to allivate the problem outside his buildings. Babalou went through the same thing, and I believe their SUV has been pulled or set to expire because the city will not renew it after some similar issues.
So this is the parking lot that is supposed to be turned into a park.
The developer of Blue may care, but the owner doesn't. He has done this everywhere he has gone. It is not a coincedence that his club's produce the highest crime, and that's in all sorts of neighborhoods.
The develpoper won't do anything because Blue is her only revenue producer. The restaurant space is empty, mostly because no one wants to set-up next to Blue. She forces that, Blue could leave, and she has property that's empty and no way to pay the taxes or mortage, if there is one.
This whole situation stinks.
As for the petition, it was presented in passing. I'll have to see if I can find it.
EDIT:No. The lot that will become a park is north of Blue. It is bounded by St. Paul, Pacific/Live Oak and Harwood and just south of One Dallas Center. Blue's lot is bounded by Pacific, Harwood, Elm and Olive. The Patrons also use the curb on Elm and the Elm Street Garage.
Last edited by FoUTASportscaster; 02 October 2006 at 05:22 PM.
What are his other clubs and in what neighborhoods are they in?
To say a club produces crime is like saying rap music causes violence (paging Steve Blow).
But let's assume clubs do cause crime, well Purgatory is only but a few blocks away, and then you have Club Europa which is also a few blocks away. If anything, they would contribute just as much to crime as does Blue.
Tighten the female dog!
I don't say clubs produce crime. I'm telling you this guys club's produce crime.
Type his name in the search and you'll see the examples.
Then....if the developers are really interested in building this project.....they will find new managemant for Blue....change the concept if they must, ( I dont't think 18 year olds should be out at bars Downtown anyway), and maybe then the City should consider providing incentives for this building.
I did a Google search on "Keith Black Club Blue" and "Keith Black Dallas" and I could not find any examples at least on the first 4 pages.
Do you know any of the top off your head?
If we are going to blame crime on a club, then let's lay blame on all the clubs in the vicinty: Purgatory and Club Europa, the spillover from Deep Ellum, and Blue.
But on the topic of 18-20 group and proposed restrictions...
They are some bad actors that go to these clubs...but many of these patrons go to these clubs because they are DOWNTOWN.
It is not just the wealthy and young professionals that want to have fun downtown, but so does your 18-20 crowd. They are as much as attracted to the revitalized downtown as are your condo residents.
We shouldn't deter that.
Manhattan is place for all ages, all races and incomes. DTD should be that same place as well.
Tighten the female dog!
AeroD, I believe he meant to do that on the forum search tool. I know I have read the same things he is referring to - other posts, by other forumers, relating to previous clubs the current Blue-owner has run. He does have a track record, at least according to what I have read on this forum, and it isn't good.
I tell everyone...I smile just because...I've got a city love...
The first of the downtown surveillance cameras are supposed to be up and running this week.
By the end of the year there will be 40 cameras covering 31 different downtown locations. I'm sure at least one of those locations will be the area around Club Blue.
It will be interesting to see what kind of effect it has on their patrons.
Buckhead in Atlanta was having similar party problems, installed cameras, and I think it's helped.
Awesome, I'm all for it.
....
Last edited by Boredkid; 09 October 2006 at 04:37 PM.
If I remeber correctly, Mr. Black was part owner of the defunct Lime Bar on CedarSprings (I worked the door at a private party there once). DMagazine even mentioned it once as the place in town where the "pretty people" hung out. Started out upscale and then began to become a problem on the gay strip. The problems being noise, loitering, and fighting. He also owned a very popular club in the 90's on Park Lane and Central called Iguana Mirage, that, again, if I'm not mistaken, at one time had the highest liquor sales of any nightclub in the state. There was a lenghty story about him in the DMN a few years ago before Blue opened.
As part of the tin-foil hat caucus, I am hesitant to support the use of cameras.
Some may argue, "If you are law-abiding citizen you have nothing to worry about."
But for that same reason - cos' I am law-abiding citizen - I shouldn't have to be watched.
The City or Feds want to install cameras around their buildings that is fine. If an office building, or condo tower wants install their own cameras then that is cool.
But it just creeps me out that some government employee will be in a control room watching 40 screen shots of DTD.
Last edited by AeroD; 03 October 2006 at 02:33 PM.
Tighten the female dog!
....
Last edited by Boredkid; 09 October 2006 at 04:38 PM.
What's wrong with lovebirds from going over board? This of course depends on your definition of "over board". People shouldn't be having sex in public, but making out, what's wrong with that?
Yes, I can get disgusted when I see PDA out on the streets.
But when I am the one committing "crime"....hey it's fun.
Plus it gives you great stories when you get old to tell your grandkids..."Yeah, I made out with a girl right in front of the Corrigan Tower (or on a bench on Woodall Rogers park)."
Plus Cameras won't deter that. Living in Austin, I purposely, on a date, made out with a girl in front of the Governor's Mansion giving a thumbs up to the Camera.
On the homeless....
Yeah. Homeless people will probably sleep someplace else if cameras are present, but all you are doing is sweeping the problem underneath the rug.
Tighten the female dog!
Try these.
http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showthread.php?t=5216
http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/sh...ht=Keith+black
From Google
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....135b64c0.html
http://www.quickdfw.com/columnists/l...1.3ed2d4c.html
http://www.dallasarena.com/s051228davis.htm
As for the other clubs, there aren't the crime problems that exists at Club Blue. You won't see three DPD police cars around Purgatory. In Deep Ellum, you'll see the cars, but it isn't specific to one club.
Question. You seem to be defending Blue, when City Officials, DTD residents and property owners believe there is a problem. Why? No one is against night clubs in DTD. We are against night clubs that cause problems. And right now that is Club Blue. El Angel had a shooting recently, but that appears to be an isolated incident and the owners are cooperating with the city, unlike Mr. Black.
As someone who works in politics (I work in the Lege), I know first hand politicians, and the agencies they control, prefer to address things in the short term by finding the weakest link in a problem and getting rid of that link, instead of the addressing whole problem with a long-term strategy.
Tighten the female dog!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks