Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JasnoDTX

New Dallas Development

Recommended Posts

very odd that they committed the top floor to tenant taking less than half the floor.

 

Probably their best option / trying to create some kind of buzz. It just feels like they are trying really hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice recent photo of the Craig Hall/KPMG arts highrise.(On the left side with crane) Its not a tall skyscraper but it adds needed density/thickness to downtown. Can't wait to see more updated skyline pics with it included in the future.

 

15302319361_a70def6352_h.jpg

 

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Park/Pedestrian Bridge in Dallas. I don't know the name of the development, but it use to be a vehicle bridge in Dallas. Very nice! Stay progressive Dallas! Don't let the haters stop your progress!

lztx.jpg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Park/Pedestrian Bridge in Dallas. I don't know the name of the development, but it use to be a vehicle bridge in Dallas. Very nice! Stay progressive Dallas! Don't let the haters stop your progress!

lztx.jpg

 

Wow! Very nice. I couldn't even tell that was Dallas at first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Park/Pedestrian Bridge in Dallas. I don't know the name of the development, but it use to be a vehicle bridge in Dallas. Very nice! Stay progressive Dallas! Don't let the haters stop your progress!

lztx.jpg

i think its the Continental Ave Bridge? or something like that.. an interesting concept but the end product is not as cool as the original renderings made it out to seem.

i hope those blue lights on top of the poles arent copies of Buffalo Bayous lunar lighting cycle..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: When was the Chase logo placed on the Chase Tower there? Not a huge fan. One of the better sky lobbies out there, though access has been awkward in recent years from my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are nice pictures looks very nice it is all about walkability in any city.  We should not mock the third largest city in Texas.  They have some good things to our north. :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Dallas. I guess that gives me the right to look at this ridiculous sub-forum and to say what I want about it until they ban me.  And don't worry, they WILL ban me (again), I'm not worried about it. User names are plentiful.

 

What the hell do you care about it, anyway? Dallas has some nice stuff, but this is nothing.  And you can stuff it where the sun don't shine. (BTW, that would not be this new bridge/park with sewer view - the sun definitely shines there.) 

 

Now, go make up some more b.s. about what you "think" is going on in Houston and get a life. Urbanizer has us covered.

 

I'm not sure what you're talking about.  I checked the records, and you were never banned.  We've banned maybe three people in 12 years of HAIF, so don't flatter yourself.  Though I do find it ironic that you're accusing someone else of "mak[ing] up some more b.s." while you, yourself, lie about being banned.

 

If you consider this subforum "ridiculous," then feel free to surf elsewhere.  It's a big internet.  Go find somewhere else to be a jerk.

 

As for the rest of your recent comments in this thread, I'll re-state my last private message to you, which was to take some time to re-read and consider the Terms of Service you agreed to when you signed up for HAIF.  Personal attacks are not permitted.  You have been repeatedly warned about this.  If you (or anyone else) cannot participate in a discussion in a civil manner, your posting privileges will be abridged once again.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I'll agree that the bridge is ...somewhat of an overstatement for the area, Dallas has plans to redevelop that mostly empty industrial warehouse area to the southwest of Downtown.  Parkspace that is created out of nothing, or worse still - a former industrial blight/overly engineered flood zone such as this particular area of Dallas - is even better.  Props to Dallas for reimagining its more underused neighborhoods.  If anything Houston should take note.  Dallas' Victory Park is a success, and home to some nice modern architecture.  While this particular redevelopment zone may never reach that scale, at least they are thinking big.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you're talking about.  I checked the records, and you were never banned.  We've banned maybe three people in 12 years of HAIF, so don't flatter yourself.  Though I do find it ironic that you're accusing someone else of "mak[ing] up some more b.s." while you, yourself, lie about being banned.

 

If you consider this subforum "ridiculous," then feel free to surf elsewhere.  It's a big internet.  Go find somewhere else to be a jerk.

 

As for the rest of your recent comments in this thread, I'll re-state my last private message to you, which was to take some time to re-read and consider the Terms of Service you agreed to when you signed up for HAIF.  Personal attacks are not permitted.  You have been repeatedly warned about this.  If you (or anyone else) cannot participate in a discussion in a civil manner, your posting privileges will be abridged once again.

lol rekt

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the bridge, I wish it was half the height. I'm not just saying this because it's in Dallas, I wouldn't like it if it were here. It's odd. But the revitalization to the area is amazing!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: When was the Chase logo placed on the Chase Tower there? Not a huge fan. One of the better sky lobbies out there, though access has been awkward in recent years from my experience.

 

I dont know but I kinda like the logo. Tacky maybe to some though. By the way I went to my gf's high school prom in that sky lobby. It was awesome! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the bridge, I wish it was half the height. I'm not just saying this because it's in Dallas, I wouldn't like it if it were here. It's odd. But the revitalization to the area is amazing!

 

I definitely understand people saying the bridge is an overstatement.Many say it looks silly over our "little creek" 

But keep in minding that little creek SWELLS to fill up to the levy during rain. Giving us a wide river.

 

However as you might know there are plans to turn that area into small lakes so the bridge will have something beautiful to cross over. They want to make it for public recreation like what Austin has. I personally cant wait to see that. One has been approved. I haven't been keeping up with specifics.

 

In other words it won't be a little creek forever. The city was looking way into the future with the bridge. It will look better with lots of water consistently under it.

1-26%20Bridge%20sunset-XL.jpg

Edited by JasnoDTX
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: When was the Chase logo placed on the Chase Tower there? Not a huge fan. One of the better sky lobbies out there, though access has been awkward in recent years from my experience.

Yeah.. The Dallas skyline is all corporate logo'd out.. Kind of weird in relation to downtown Houston's skyline that doesn't even have a Continental logo anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely understand people saying the bridge is an overstatement.Many say it looks silly over our "little creek"

But keep in minding that little creek SWELLS to fill up to the levy during rain. Giving us a wide river.

However as you might know there are plans to turn that area into small lakes so the bridge will have something beautiful to cross over. They want to make it for public recreation like what Austin has. I personally cant wait to see that. One has been approved. I haven't been keeping up with specifics.

In other words it won't be a little creek forever. The city was looking way into the future with the bridge. It will look better with lots of water consistently under it.

1-26%20Bridge%20sunset-XL.jpg

But the have released specifics on it.. The 300 acres of lakes will now only be 40 acres, split between two ponds. Unfortunately that area will never be close to Lady Bird Lake... I wish that weren't the case. There's a lot of potential but there was even more over sight during planning of the project...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said I havent been keeping up  with the specifics. Yes only the smaller plans have been approved but from my understanding is that they will continue to fight to make it as big as possible. It's an evolutionary process and the plans can change anytime. Here's to hoping they will continue the fight. :D

 

I dont care about the 300 acres now.  I just want some nice water in the downtown area. The other areas of the river down and up can do whatever.

Edited by JasnoDTX
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heres to hoping.. but it looks like it will cost hundreds of millions of dollars in over runs that they originally didnt anticipate.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/best-southwest/headlines/20140225-ambitious-trinity-lakes-plan-evaporates-into-puddles.ece

 

 

 

 

That plan called for a 90-acre Urban Lake, a 56-acre Natural Lake and a 128-acre West Dallas Lake.

Now — more than 15 years later — the city is finally poised to move forward. But with what?

Nearly $20 million of the $31.5 million in lakes money has been diverted to pay for the overall Trinity project’s design and schematics. And now only about $8 million is left for the actual lakes.

That remaining chunk would be applied toward the 23-acre version of the Urban Lake, next to downtown.

The rest of the Urban Lake’s $36 million cost would be covered by money marked for the Trinity Parkway toll road. That money can be applied because the dirt dug out to create the lake would create portions of a “bench” to support the road.

To build the smaller version of the West Dallas Lake, east of Westmoreland Road, the city would use $8 million in stormwater funds. Though that lake has been advertised as 21 acres, officials said it would likely be smaller.

...

The lakes, for instance, must not disturb the outfalls that allow water to drain into the Trinity. Also, if the lakes come within 200 feet of the Trinity, the land would need to be reinforced to prevent a washout.

And the lakes must coexist with the bridge piers that cross the Trinity. Older bridges’ piers don’t go to bedrock. So the lakes would have to go around those piers — which is what’s being done on the smaller Urban Lake — or the city would have to retrofit piers, at $1 million apiece.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely understand people saying the bridge is an overstatement.Many say it looks silly over our "little creek" 

But keep in minding that little creek SWELLS to fill up to the levy during rain. Giving us a wide river.

 

However as you might know there are plans to turn that area into small lakes so the bridge will have something beautiful to cross over. They want to make it for public recreation like what Austin has. I personally cant wait to see that. One has been approved. I haven't been keeping up with specifics.

 

In other words it won't be a little creek forever. The city was looking way into the future with the bridge. It will look better with lots of water consistently under it.

 

That's pretty funny.  Build a bridge and then go about figuring out how to get some water under it.  Hey, as long as it has some snazzy lighting.  ;-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its going to be a crazy puzzle to figure out. Instead of trying too hard with all of this why couldnt they just put up a dam south of downtown? A dam that would control water flow to prevent flooding? That way we'll always have a nice thick river for recreation.

 

Of course people traveling by kayak/boat would have to go around the dam to go south on the Trinity?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its going to be a crazy puzzle to figure out. Instead of trying too hard with all of this why couldnt they just put up a dam south of downtown? A dam that would control water flow to prevent flooding? That way we'll always have a nice thick river for recreation.

 

Of course people traveling by kayak/boat would have to go around the dam to go south on the Trinity?

yeah ive wondered that as well.. its a fantastic plan, they are just going to have to find a few Klyde Warren Park-esque donors to fish over hundreds of millions, get TxDot or whoever to come out and do all the infrastructure replacement on the bridges, and get the Army Corp of Engineers to come out and build new dikes/dams between the lakes and the river.. no easy task. :S heh

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely understand people saying the bridge is an overstatement.Many say it looks silly over our "little creek"

But keep in minding that little creek SWELLS to fill up to the levy during rain. Giving us a wide river.

However as you might know there are plans to turn that area into small lakes so the bridge will have something beautiful to cross over. They want to make it for public recreation like what Austin has. I personally cant wait to see that. One has been approved. I haven't been keeping up with specifics.

In other words it won't be a little creek forever. The city was looking way into the future with the bridge. It will look better with lots of water consistently under it.

1-26%20Bridge%20sunset-XL.jpg

Even with lots of water it's height is too dramatic. It doesn't look right to me. I mean it's a very nice bridge but that height is ridiculous.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off topic, Ebola has just arrived in America, in Dallas of all places.  Don't you just love it!?  My advice is stay away from Dallas, and if you go, don't come back!  

 

On topic, I very much dislike this bridge.  It's too much for a river that is so small.  At least this one is pretty distant from downtown Dallas though.

 

I think I saw a conceptual drawing where a similar bridge was spanning Buffalo Bayou near downtown, what a terrible idea.  It's a bayou, no need for over-the-top stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHA! Watching the newscast now. The patient is at the same hospital I was born at....And if they let me out then I worry for our country. lol

 

 

/ It's too much for a river that is so small/ This and possible solutions have already been addressed in previous replies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the Ebola confirmation in Dallas is news - just sit back and watch the crazies come out with pitchforks and freakout.  Now, if there end up being confirmed cases all over the country.... then that might warrant some freaking.  Although Ebola is similar to AIDS - its transmitted via secretions and body fluids - not airborne.  However, it kills much more quickly than AIDS.  Also, it has a 21 day period where a carrier may not show symptoms.  That is the scary part of it!  Other than that I think the affect of a large scale outbreak across the US would be about the same as in Africa - which when you consider we've got 300,000,000+ people that's a drop in the bucket.

 

Perhaps people will finally start washing their hands?!

 

I've long felt the scale of the bridge to be simply too large for this.  The odd part of the bridge is Dallas' proximity to...well...nothing really big enough for the scale of this thing.  Still a cool sculptural addition to their skyline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

/ It's too much for a river that is so small/ This and possible solutions have already been addressed in previous replies.

Ehh, I too agree it's too much for a river that small.. It's only 36' shorter than the Fred Hartman. Bridge, which spans the Houston Ship Channel, one of the busiest stretches of water in the country..

What has to pass under MHH that requires a bridge so tall? Not to mention the bridge was 180 million and only 1/3rd of a mile long.. Just overkill in every regard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never really liked the design of that bridge either, because I said that it looks too much like the St. Louis Arch. But in the end its an improvement for Dallas. I like that Dallas isn't all about the cheapest most efficient use of funds when it comes to aesthetics in its city. Sometimes its about the look and you have to spend money if you want a look of class and sophistication.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off topic, Ebola has just arrived in America, in Dallas of all places.  Don't you just love it!?  My advice is stay away from Dallas, and if you go, don't come back!  

 

On topic, I very much dislike this bridge.  It's too much for a river that is so small.  At least this one is pretty distant from downtown Dallas though.

 

I think I saw a conceptual drawing where a similar bridge was spanning Buffalo Bayou near downtown, what a terrible idea.  It's a bayou, no need for over-the-top stuff.

Take the tinfoil off and calm down, Ebola is only spread through bodily fluids so unless you had a blood transplant or had sex with someone who just got back from Africa then you're fine. 

 

This is becoming insanely over-hyped by people who have no understanding of the very basics of the virus at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This 8 lane, 2.6 mile long, 436' tall bridge for 91 million (1998)

Fred_Hartman_Bridge_Houston.jpg

Compared to this 6 lane, 1/3 of a mile long, 400' tall bridge for 180 million (2011)

134163-mmmbridgedddd-thumb-550x322-13416

No offense Dallasites, but I think Houston got the clear winner here.. Our bridge just wasn't designed by a world famous architect.. It was another fantastic design from a TxDot architect.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and there's an actual purpose for it too! That would be a novelty for anything near downtown dallas. Talk about cheap, that McBridge in dallas looks like it was purchased out of a catalog and placed in a prairie. YUCK!

Actually, it was ripped off from an Italian bridge. The architect literally copied the same design from a bridge he did in Italy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

91 Million vs 180 million. Yea that is a huge ripoff. Might have been better going with TxDot.......But hey don't worry about offending Dallasites. We're not the ones choosing the designer. Wish we could get some money back on that! 

 

And yes it IS a copy of an Italian bridge, same designer. They were very open about that. No controversy there. (except for the money spent)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You paid for the name. It's a nice bridge, just way over the top and overpriced for the transportation needs both above and below the bridge.. I heard it currently only carries like 30k cars a day? And there is no significant boats navigating the Trinity. Fred Hartman has a capacity of up to 200k vehicles a day (though it's currently only around 80-90k. That will jump quite a bit when they build the final section of the Grand Parkway through League City/Kemah and complete the loop), while countless huge ships pass underneath every day.

Edited by cloud713

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred Hartman would probably cost A LOT more today in our current environment.  1998 was 16 years ago.  That's quite a length of time.

 

Dallas wanted a neat bridge, it didn't need one, but they wanted one - so they built it.  Still interesting sculptural element out on the prairie.  I'm sure some from Dallas would have preferred spending that money elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let's compare how low the roadway is on the Dallas Bridge. It stays the same height the whole time. Maybe if it came half way up the tower like the Fred Hartman, the arch wouldn't look so out of scale.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred Hartman would probably cost A LOT more today in our current environment. 1998 was 16 years ago. That's quite a length of time.

Dallas wanted a neat bridge, it didn't need one, but they wanted one - so they built it. Still interesting sculptural element out on the prairie. I'm sure some from Dallas would have preferred spending that money elsewhere.

Yeah, it would cost a bit over 120 million in 2011 dollars I believe.. Still, we got a phenomenal deal on a much larger bridge which happens to be an interesting sculptural element as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it would cost a bit over 120 million in 2011 dollars I believe.. Still, we got a phenomenal deal on a much larger bridge which happens to be an interesting sculptural element as well.

 

 

The Hunt Hill bridge cost $69.6M - the rest was for land acquisition, design, inspections and ramps.  Since a bridge extending Woodall Rogers was going to be built anyway, Dallas decided to build a nice bridge, instead of yet another boring overpass.  Years from now, nobody is going to care how much the Margaret cost - it's a nice addition to the Dallas skyline paid for, in part, with private funds. 

 

Data source: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/margaret-hunt-hill-bridge/bridge-headlines/20120221-true-cost-of-dallas-margaret-hunt-hill-bridge-182-million.ece

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hunt Hill bridge cost $69.6M - the rest was for land acquisition, design, inspections and ramps. Since a bridge extending Woodall Rogers was going to be built anyway, Dallas decided to build a nice bridge, instead of yet another boring overpass. Years from now, nobody is going to care how much the Margaret cost - it's a nice addition to the Dallas skyline paid for, in part, with private funds.

Data source: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/margaret-hunt-hill-bridge/bridge-headlines/20120221-true-cost-of-dallas-margaret-hunt-hill-bridge-182-million.ece

That's debatable... I still much prefer Houston's bridge. And I'm a Calatrava fan...

The Hunt Hill bridge cost $69.6M - the rest was for land acquisition, design, inspections and ramps. Since a bridge extending Woodall Rogers was going to be built anyway, Dallas decided to build a nice bridge, instead of yet another boring overpass. Years from now, nobody is going to care how much the Margaret cost - it's a nice addition to the Dallas skyline paid for, in part, with private funds.

Data source: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/margaret-hunt-hill-bridge/bridge-headlines/20120221-true-cost-of-dallas-margaret-hunt-hill-bridge-182-million.ece

That's debatable... I still much prefer Houston's bridge. And I'm a Calatrava fan...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I applaud Dallas and Dallasites for trying to do something beyond the bare minimum.  And ... well, while I don't care for this particular Calatrava design, I think that it is something that local people will feel proud of and will also be the subject of many postcard-type photos promoting the city to outsiders.  That is not a bad thing.  Aside from that, there is still the argument as to whether it was money well-spend, regardless of how much of it was funded from taxes vs. private philanthropy.  

 

As for the Hartman Bridge, I like it.  Unfortunately, very few residents and virtually no visitors ever see it.  So, while attractive, it does nothing to promote the city.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that prefer a little more nature environment there is trails below the bridges along the Trinty River that were recently built.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that prefer a little more nature environment there is trails below the bridges along the Trinty River that were recently built.

Oh, so like the trails along all the bayous here in Houston? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got that right, only here we don't have outlets you call bayous we got real rivers, lakes and creeks with trails.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got that right, only here we don't have outlets you call bayous we got real rivers, lakes and creeks with trails.

"real" rivers? i hope you arent referring to that tiny stream known as the Trinity.  :P 

heres an online answer/excerpt to save me time..

 

 

 

The Trinity River passes to the east of Houston. 

The Brazos River passes to the west of Houston. 

Various creeks (many of which are locally called "bayous") flow through the city. Among them, Armand Bayou, Brays Bayou, Buffalo Bayou, Clear Creek, Cypress Creek, Greens Bayou, Halls Bayou, Hunting Bayou, Sims Bayou and White Oak Bayou are the most widely-known

 

 

Lake Conroe, Lake Houston, Clear Lake, Lake Woodlands, Sheldon Lake, Smithers Lake, McGovern Lake, Kinder Lake, Lake Anahuac, Willow Waterhole, ect..

oh yeah, also Galveston Bay, West Bay, East Bay, Trinity Bay, and a handful of other smaller bays. along with that one body of water known as the Gulf of Mexico.

nope.. no water around here. :rolleyes:

sounds like someone is a little jealous they dont have any of this...

c87910e3dd8b678f45f1624dde65b959.jpg

photo-of-kemah-boardwalk.png

dannyy-840241-albums-houston-metropolita

dannyy-840241-albums-houston-metropolita

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great pics. Are those areas part of Houston proper?(within city limits) If not what suburbs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great pics. Are those areas part of Houston proper?(within city limits) If not what suburbs?

the first one is the Pleasure Pier in Galveston. the second is the Kemah Boardwalk in Kemah/next to Clear Lake (not sure if that one technically qualifies as "Houston" or not.. i think it does?), and the last two are on the East Beach in Galveston. so no, at least 3 out of 4 arent technically "Houston".. but they are included in the metro. not trying to start an argument here with the Dallas posters, most of you guys are civil and great posters. i just thought it was humorous D F W came in here as a brand new member and right off the bat started trying to slander Houston on a Houston website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...