Dallas's Victory Project Vs. HPavilions/East Downtown Development

[Houston19514]

I'm not surprised you don't understand the relevance to this topic. That has seemed to be a problem from the beginning. I'm not saying it's the best we can do, I'm saying it is a very positive thing for downtown Dallas. Time will tell. How about we meet here in 1 year and analyze real estate and housing data to see who is right? I'll make an Outlook reminder now.

Jason

That was not really necessary, now was it, Jason? How about instead of snarky comments, you try explaining the relevance of Dallas' one-sided growth pattern to the question of whether Victory is good or bad for downtown Dallas? Because as far as I can tell, the relevance is zero. If Dallas had perfectly concentric growth and development in all directions, I would still believe (and the evidence strongly suggests) that Victory is bad for downtown Dallas.

Be sure to send me an e-mail in a year. I'm not putting this on Outlook reminder. (I'll have to trust you to be a big man about it and be willing to remind me even though downtown Dallas office occupancy is down. FWIW, one year is really not sufficient. Most of the new office space will not be completed yet and the current space will not yet have been vacated.)

[JasonDFW]

That was not really necessary, now was it, Jason? How about instead of snarky comments, you try explaining the relevance of Dallas' one-sided growth pattern to the question of whether Victory is good or bad for downtown Dallas? Because as far as I can tell, the relevance is zero. If Dallas had perfectly concentric growth and development in all directions, I would still believe (and the evidence strongly suggests) that Victory is bad for downtown Dallas.

Be sure to send me an e-mail in a year. I'm not putting this on Outlook reminder. (I'll have to trust you to be a big man about it and be willing to remind me even though downtown Dallas office occupancy is down. FWIW, one year is really not sufficient. Most of the new office space will not be completed yet and the current space will not yet have been vacated.)

I'm sorry that came off as snarky, honestly it wasn't meant to be so. Just the weakness of the medium. What I'm saying is I'm not surprised my discussion wasn't able to convince you, because you start off with such a diametrically opposite viewpoint on the situation to begin with.

There must be a communication problem though because if you don't understand how the one-sided growth pattern is relevant to the discussion, and makes victory a boost for downtown (shifting the balance of economy southerly in the Metroplex) there is no way I'm going to get my point across.

Jason

[Houston19514]

I'm sorry that came off as snarky, honestly it wasn't meant to be so. Just the weakness of the medium. What I'm saying is I'm not surprised my discussion wasn't able to convince you, because you start off with such a diametrically opposite viewpoint on the situation to begin with.

There must be a communication problem though because if you don't understand how the one-sided growth pattern is relevant to the discussion, and makes victory a boost for downtown (shifting the balance of economy southerly in the Metroplex) there is no way I'm going to get my point across.

Jason

That's the first time you've tried to explain it. ;-) The theory of shifting the balance of the economy southerly is interesting and I can now at least see how your one-sided development discussion is relevant.

BUT, I think your theory is based on a bad premise. I see Victory/Uptown as shifting the balance of the economy north out of downtown, not south from the suburbs. How many tenants are moving from the suburbs into Victory/Uptown? How many tenants are moving from downtown into Victory/Uptown?

I guess your sub-premise, if you will, is that downtown Dallas is so unattractive (economically or whatever) that, but for Victory/Uptown, those tenants would be moving to the northern suburbs. (If that is true, it's a shame that Dallas has allowed its downtown to drop to such depths, and perhaps the best thing to do is to just let it die as a commercial center, or to hasten its death by building a new alternative downtown. And you can call it Uptown!) I don't buy any of that sub-premise.

Perhaps SOME of the relocations to Uptown/Victory would have gone to Plano etc instead, but I really doubt if very many would have. If you are currently officed downtown and are shopping your tenancy... in a world without Victory, are many of those tenants really going to choose to move 20-25 miles? Remember the mantra of real estate: location, location, location. One would presume they were located in downtown to begin with because they wanted/needed to be in or near downtown. If they are willing to relocate north to Victory/Uptown, there must be some reason they prefer inner city Dallas. That tells me that, but for Victory/Uptown, they would more than likely stay downtown. And keep in mind that in a world without Uptown and Victory developments, there might be enough demand in downtown Dallas to allow for moves into newer, fancier buildings downtown.

[JasonDFW]

BUT, I think your theory is based on a bad premise. I see Victory/Uptown as shifting the balance of the economy north out of downtown, not south from the suburbs. How many tenants are moving from the suburbs into Victory/Uptown? How many tenants are moving from downtown into Victory/Uptown?

The center of the economy isn't in downtown, that has been my point. The center of the economy (and population) is in Las Colinas. The Dallas CDB isn't too far from the economic edge of the metroplex. A built up Victory means a shift in that, or at least a slowing of the northern shift.

Also, the areas north of Victory are nearly built out for residential so they're building south of the CBD which I believe helps the CBD.

I guess your sub-premise, if you will, is that downtown Dallas is so unattractive (economically or whatever) that, but for Victory/Uptown, those tenants would be moving to the northern suburbs.

It's become so unattractive geographically, not economically. I'm not saying it is a fabulous downtown, there are many flaws. A lot of them are being worked on aggressively though. But yes, some of them would move to the suburbs, and even more perhaps that'd move to say the Galleria area, which is nearly as bad to the CBD. In general these types of boards are anti-suburbs, but say what you want about (for instance) Frisco. They are a very tough competitor no matter how good the Dallas CBD may become. When you save that 1% transit tax and can throw it at corporations to move there, that is a powerful tool. Of course, nearly everyone has this problem but what most cities also have is another "Southlake" on the south side to counter the pull of Frisco. And there are efforts trying to address that too, but it will be a slow process.

Perhaps SOME of the relocations to Uptown/Victory would have gone to Plano etc instead, but I really doubt if very many would have. If you are currently officed downtown and are shopping your tenancy... in a world without Victory, are many of those tenants really going to choose to move 20-25 miles?

Most of them already live 20-25 miles away, so they wouldn't need to move.

Remember the mantra of real estate: location, location, location. One would presume they were located in downtown to begin with because they wanted/needed to be in or near downtown. If they are willing to relocate north to Victory/Uptown, there must be some reason they prefer inner city Dallas. That tells me that, but for Victory/Uptown, they would more than likely stay downtown. And keep in mind that in a world without Uptown and Victory developments, there might be enough demand in downtown Dallas to allow for moves into newer, fancier buildings downtown.

I understand and agree with your points, but we're already getting newer, fancier buildings downtown (I don't remember ANY before Victory started) and I think they're in part due to the excitement of Victory. Now, I think that holds much more so for Hunt than One Arts for sure, as the arts district buildup is a big player in that.

I may regret saying this, but If I had the choice between these offices moving to a new building in the southwest end of downtown or them going to Victory, I think I'd choose victory because that is slowly connecting two neighborhoods (partially responsible momentum toward a W.R. park) and ultimately I think that will be better for the whole area down there. It's a close call.

Jason

[Houston19514]

The center of the economy isn't in downtown, that has been my point. The center of the economy (and population) is in Las Colinas. The Dallas CDB isn't too far from the economic edge of the metroplex. A built up Victory means a shift in that, or at least a slowing of the northern shift.

Jason

I'm afraid you missed my point. I completely agree that downtown Dallas is far from the economic center of Dallas. But, where you see a buildup of Victory shifting the center to the south (or at least slowing the northern shift), I see a buildup of Victory actually shifting the center slightly more to the north. Which one of us is right depends on where Victory tenants are moving from, and to a lesser extent, where they would have moved (or not moved, as the case may be) if the buildup of Victory were not occurring.

From what I have seen (and I could very easily be wrong on this), it appears that the bulk of tenants moving into Victory are moving from downtown. If so, the mathematical exercise of calculating the economic center would show a slight shift further to the north. Possibly offsetting that to some extent is the possibility that those former downtown tenants would have moved to Plano etc if the buildup of Victory were not there.

I don't buy that there would be wholesale moves from downtown to Plano if Victory weren't being built up. It varies from company to company of course, but I am VERY confident that Haynes & Boone and the other large law firms would not be moving to Plano even if Victory were not available. AND, since we're dealing in hypotheticals, IF Victory weren't being built up it seems much more likely that there would enough demand downtown for new multi-tenant buildings to be built IN downtown Dallas, further decreasing the likelihood of relocations to Plano (for those tenants who just want to move to a newer fancier building, no matter the location). By the same token, if a downtown tenant wants a suburban location,there is nothing at Victory to keep them in the central city (except that it does appear in photos at least to have a pretty car-centric, suburban-office-park ambience going. ;-)

[JasonDFW]

From what I have seen (and I could very easily be wrong on this), it appears that the bulk of tenants moving into Victory are moving from downtown.

This is not the feeling I have from what I've seen. In the articles posted before, even they mention that with one exception no highly sought after space (decent views) are being opened up downtown by Victory.

By the same token, if a downtown tenant wants a suburban location,there is nothing at Victory to keep them in the central city (except that it does appear in photos at least to have a pretty car-centric, suburban-office-park ambience going. ;-)

In the Metroplex at least, there are no 375' residental buildings going up down the street from suburban office parks.

Jason

[RedScare]

This is not the feeling I have from what I've seen. In the articles posted before, even they mention that with one exception no highly sought after space (decent views) are being opened up downtown by Victory.

Just how many tenants have signed on to Victory anyway? I know Haynes & Boone is the only tenant in Victory Tower. WFAA is moving from it's downtown digs. Obviously, The Mavericks and Stars left downtown.

But, there is not much other office space out there right now, is there? So, all of this talk is really speculative, since only a couple of tenants have even signed.

Am I right on this?

[rantanamo]

Bashing? Good grief. Just a little light humor about the juxtaposition of a W Hotel blocks away from a Hooters. Get over yourself already.

no, you get over yourself. You refuse to understand what is being stated to you many times, because you want to compare apples to oranges as if they are apples to apples.

I'm not sure what Dallas' supposed greater competition really has to do with the question at hand of whether Victory helps or hurts downtown Dallas. But for whatever reason, it does seem clear that Victory and Uptown are better at the competition than downtown is. However much of a tangent it may be, I'll play along for a bit. Are the suburbs offering incentives to builders and tenants? Well, so is Sugar Land, and probably The Woodlands, so Houston is certainly not totally devoid of such issues. D-FW may have more trouble in this regard than Houston (again, tell me again all of you anti-zoning, anti-annexation folks why Dallas' style of planning is so much better).

I was explaining a major competition difference within the DFW metro as compared to Houston's metro. You win, Uptown is better at the competition than downtown. They offer newer, more prestigious addresses right now in a multi-node metropolitan area. They are the hot area. Who is at fault, or who as a whole is in control of why one area is doing better than another, I have no idea.

You are seriously going to compare Sugarland and The Woodlands to Plano or Irving? I respect what The Woodlands has done, but to compare it corporately to Irving or Plano? You really don't have any idea, do you? Such issues in Houston are absolutely miniscule compared to DFW.

You are mixing two different issues when you're talking about zoning and how it affects business in Dallas.

But that's all really off the point anyway. That might be some of the reason for Dallas' weak downtown office market, but whatever the competitive situation, the Victory and Uptown buildings are in the same competitive D-FW market as is downtown Dallas. And tenants are moving out of downtown Dallas and into Victory and Uptown. How is that not bad for downtown Dallas?

What's wrong with downtown Dallas' office vacancy rate? Too many old buildings left derelict for suburban moves. For years, no renovation, no reinvestment. Too many mayors and city council people using influence to develop North and Far North Dallas for too many years.

What is frustrating about your(and the statistical) argument is that you talk as if competition is only done as an area. If you are so interested in the DFW market, read some of Steve Brown's columns about the office market in Dallas(there's a whole thread at dallasmetropolis). Competition is just as fierce between buildings downtown as it is between downtown and Uptown or wherever. You'd also see that buildings have been scrambling to move space because of larger space requests. We have already seen with Fountain Place, the space is quickly absorbed. You're simplifying it way too much. You never mention any articles of such large absorption.

Are you, like JasonDFW, on the verge of agreeing with me but throwing up your hands saying, yeah, but it's the best Dallas can hope for?

You're simply wrong. I don't agree with wrong. Especially when its based on incomplete or ignorant information. Do you think I should listen to someone who compares Sugarland to a corporate powerhouse like Irving?

Of course you know very well that I never said that it makes no difference to the city if a development is within the city limits or not. What I said was that it is not terribly relevant to our discussion. Competition is competition (except of course for the added bonus of incentives that we get from suburban competitors.) Of course there is competition for tenants. What's your point? Again, is it that this is the best Dallas can hope for?

In DFW the suburbs are always relevant, which is something you just don't understand. Competition is competition, but you're not talking about even playing fields between the competitions. A municipality as large as Dallas( or Houston ) is more likely to out-tax and out incentive itself, while a Frisco or Irving, if it chooses, has more taxing 'stretch room'. Incentives are very easy to throw out. A recent example that was more public was the whole Cowboys Stadium debacle. Arlington simply had a ton of taxing room to easily add the stadium to its taxing schedule. Dallas didn't and might have taxed itself out of competition for future conventions. Why? Dallas has DART, Dallas has more services, Dallas simply had more to take care of financially. If Dallas was the only big dog, you might not have had a suburban challenge, but when Jerry came calling, probably 70% of the suburbs had a bid for the stadium of some sort.

Again, we all like to compare Houston and Dallas as similar place, but they simply aren't. We should leave it at that.

Just how many tenants have signed on to Victory anyway? I know Haynes & Boone is the only tenant in Victory Tower. WFAA is moving from it's downtown digs. Obviously, The Mavericks and Stars left downtown. wink.gif

But, there is not much other office space out there right now, is there? So, all of this talk is really speculative, since only a couple of tenants have even signed.

Am I right on this?

Red, Red, Red. Just please stop it while you're ahead.

a.) This is the first marketed office space in Victory. Only retail, Hotel and entertainment spaces had been announced or even anywhere near finished at this point. Tecnhically, Hillwood was the first to announce taking office space. Second were the Stars and Mavs. We're still very early in a 30+ building development.

b.) WFAA isn't moving. That's like saying Citgo is moving into your corner store. The WFAA space is a small studio for live broadcasts. Kind of like the morning broadcasting space in Times Square. Again, you're jumping the gun on this. They are/have broken ground on the first few buildings. Obviously there's enough leasing to justify them building. I'm doubting they want to waste money. Especially on land that expensive. I think you guys are way jumping the gun trying to look for negative. If you guys really believe that these companies wouldn't be skeedadling up to Frisco, then I suggest apprenticing for a corporate leasing agent. I get clients coming in everyday who talk about their companies looking at cheaper, more flexible space up north. It is really no joke.

[Houston19514]

no, you get over yourself. You refuse to understand what is being stated to you many times, because you want to compare apples to oranges as if they are apples to apples.

I was explaining a major competition difference within the DFW metro as compared to Houston's metro. You win, Uptown is better at the competition than downtown. They offer newer, more prestigious addresses right now in a multi-node metropolitan area. They are the hot area. Who is at fault, or who as a whole is in control of why one area is doing better than another, I have no idea.

You are seriously going to compare Sugarland and The Woodlands to Plano or Irving? I respect what The Woodlands has done, but to compare it corporately to Irving or Plano? You really don't have any idea, do you? Such issues in Houston are absolutely miniscule compared to DFW.

You are mixing two different issues when you're talking about zoning and how it affects business in Dallas.

What's wrong with downtown Dallas' office vacancy rate? Too many old buildings left derelict for suburban moves. For years, no renovation, no reinvestment. Too many mayors and city council people using influence to develop North and Far North Dallas for too many years.

What is frustrating about your(and the statistical) argument is that you talk as if competition is only done as an area. If you are so interested in the DFW market, read some of Steve Brown's columns about the office market in Dallas(there's a whole thread at dallasmetropolis). Competition is just as fierce between buildings downtown as it is between downtown and Uptown or wherever. You'd also see that buildings have been scrambling to move space because of larger space requests. We have already seen with Fountain Place, the space is quickly absorbed. You're simplifying it way too much. You never mention any articles of such large absorption.

You're simply wrong. I don't agree with wrong. Especially when its based on incomplete or ignorant information. Do you think I should listen to someone who compares Sugarland to a corporate powerhouse like Irving?

In DFW the suburbs are always relevant, which is something you just don't understand. Competition is competition, but you're not talking about even playing fields between the competitions. A municipality as large as Dallas( or Houston ) is more likely to out-tax and out incentive itself, while a Frisco or Irving, if it chooses, has more taxing 'stretch room'. Incentives are very easy to throw out. A recent example that was more public was the whole Cowboys Stadium debacle. Arlington simply had a ton of taxing room to easily add the stadium to its taxing schedule. Dallas didn't and might have taxed itself out of competition for future conventions. Why? Dallas has DART, Dallas has more services, Dallas simply had more to take care of financially. If Dallas was the only big dog, you might not have had a suburban challenge, but when Jerry came calling, probably 70% of the suburbs had a bid for the stadium of some sort.

Again, we all like to compare Houston and Dallas as similar place, but they simply aren't. We should leave it at that.

Red, Red, Red. Just please stop it while you're ahead.

a.) This is the first marketed office space in Victory. Only retail, Hotel and entertainment spaces had been announced or even anywhere near finished at this point. Tecnhically, Hillwood was the first to announce taking office space. Second were the Stars and Mavs. We're still very early in a 30+ building development.

b.) WFAA isn't moving. That's like saying Citgo is moving into your corner store. The WFAA space is a small studio for live broadcasts. Kind of like the morning broadcasting space in Times Square. Again, you're jumping the gun on this. They are/have broken ground on the first few buildings. Obviously there's enough leasing to justify them building. I'm doubting they want to waste money. Especially on land that expensive. I think you guys are way jumping the gun trying to look for negative. If you guys really believe that these companies wouldn't be skeedadling up to Frisco, then I suggest apprenticing for a corporate leasing agent. I get clients coming in everyday who talk about their companies looking at cheaper, more flexible space up north. It is really no joke.

Over here, man. Yeah, right over here. This is the discussion... it's about Victory Park and it's efffect, positive or negative on downtown Dallas. I don't know what all that other ranting of yours was about. Let it go. Take a deep breath. Take a look around. You might notice everyone but you is having a good-natured, friendly, fact-based discussion. Feel free to join us if you are capable.

[KinkaidAlum]

I just spent a weekend in Dallas. Uptown/Victory is a really nice development. That said, there is NO WAY to spin it as a postive for downtown Dallas.

Also, as for this whole "northern" DFW economy that can't compare to anything in Houston, you might want to check again.

Houston is moving very much to the West/Northwest/Southwest. It started with Greenway Plaza and then on to Uptown. Then came the Sharpstown area and the "new" Chinatown. Then the Westchase District formed. Then came the Energy Corridor and Westlake Park. Then Sugarland came in with it's Town Center. Now there's the whole Memorial City/Town and Country makeover. The economic force in Houston is indeed very much west of the CBD but it hasn't killed downtown Houston.

[JasonDFW]

Houston is moving very much to the West/Northwest/Southwest. It started with Greenway Plaza and then on to Uptown. Then came the Sharpstown area and the "new" Chinatown. Then the Westchase District formed. Then came the Energy Corridor and Westlake Park. Then Sugarland came in with it's Town Center. Now there's the whole Memorial City/Town and Country makeover. The economic force in Houston is indeed very much west of the CBD but it hasn't killed downtown Houston.

I think you're going to want to acquaint yourself with a force on the opposite side of the Houston CBD. This small petrochemical complex. You know, all those pretty lights at night? I don't know, perhaps billions and billions of $ over there. Some nice paying jobs as well. Once again, it is not just the size (and I have checked my figures again) it is the imbalance.

Jason

[The Great Hizzy!]

I'm reading all of this and am absolutely floored how a simple point is being redirected into a long list of entirely irrelevants "points" and "factoids".

Par for the course. Jesus Christ! Monte Hall! And a few other long deceased folks.

But I'll throw this discussion (heh) a bone: I could see Victory having an overall positive impact on DT Dallas if two things happen - 1) DT Dallas begins to expand more towards Woodall Rogers and 2) development south of Victory takes place, allowing the two to meet (and this assumes a mix of residential and commercial infill).

[Dallasboi]

ha! ha! This thread is cracking me up!

I'm from Colorado Springs and like to keep my eyes on what's going on in Texas. I'm not trying to sound biased, but i agree with Houston 19514. I personally think Victory will ultimately "hurt" downtown Dallas. Sure Victory is newer, sleeker, and properly planned. It has some awesome projects, but it will be a trade-off to where you can't have one without taking away from another.

The mistake Dallas is making is not filling and improving the existing office space in its downtown before building more on the outskirts of downtown. Now what its creating are two competing markets in the ring and downtown is getting knocked out. Now most of the employers in downtown are shifting and relocating to the newer buildings in other areas.

I really hope the best for Texas's two main cities. But seeing how the Denver Pavilions project helped generate activity on 16th Street Mall, is why i placed my bets to Houston Pavilions having the bigger impact on the downtown. Dallas seems more about glitz and shine. I think that's great and that's one of the more positive things i brag about when talking about Dallas to others. Hopefully, Dallas can figure out a way to tie these two developements together where they work with eachother and not against eachother.

The thing about it is......We have Victory and The mercantile Project(Same size as HP).The Merc will have just as much impact as HP.......And it will be centrally located in Down town......Plus we still have Victory.

[houstonfella]

The major difference in Houston and Dallas is that Houston's CBD is energized and growing. Dallas' CBD is faltering and its uptown is taking root. Houston can sustain all of its burbs' growth plus with sports venues and a new Houston Pavilions entertainment district, well, we can support all of this growth (downtown and beyond). But then, Houston is America's fourth largest city.

[JasonDFW]

There is a new article from Steve Brown, the guy who's articles spurred this debate I believe. In there he said that two law firms are moving to these buildings in victory and that it was a good thing for the CBD. He (or someone he interviewed) then said these spaces would be filled by other tenants. Sorry I don't have a link but someone will find it... I have to run.

Jason

[Houston19514]

The thing about it is......We have Victory and The mercantile Project(Same size as HP).The Merc will have just as much impact as HP.......And it will be centrally located in Down town......Plus we still have Victory.

According to the website of Forest City Enterprises, the Mercantile is slated to have 30,000 square feet of retail. Not quite in the same league as HP.

[Houston19514]

There is a new article from Steve Brown, the guy who's articles spurred this debate I believe. In there he said that two law firms are moving to these buildings in victory and that it was a good thing for the CBD. He (or someone he interviewed) then said these spaces would be filled by other tenants. Sorry I don't have a link but someone will find it... I have to run.

Jason

He actually did say that, but he's using the same flawed logic that if the law firms had not chosen the Victory and Arts Districts Towers they would have moved to Plano or Irving. And that is his entire reason for saying that such moves are "good" for the CBD. (Sort of the, 'well, it's not really good, but it's the best we can hope for' argument). I remain unconvinced that any of the major law firms are likely to move their offices to Plano or Irving. That sort of move just does not tend to happen. The federal and state courthouses are not moving to Plano and Irving, and neither are the major law firms.

While he did sort of say that these spaces would be fillled by other tenants, here's exactly what he said on that subject:

"But the iconic 1980s towers that make up Dallas' skyline will be hard pressed to fill the empty spaces these moves create.

"It does finally get leased up, but it takes longer," said Joel Pustmueller with Dallas' Peloton Real Estate Partners. "My hunch is the space is not leased up by big 200,000-square-foot tenants."

[KinkaidAlum]

I think you're going to want to acquaint yourself with a force on the opposite side of the Houston CBD. This small petrochemical complex. You know, all those pretty lights at night? I don't know, perhaps billions and billions of $ over there. Some nice paying jobs as well. Once again, it is not just the size (and I have checked my figures again) it is the imbalance.

Jason

Aren't we talking about Class A office vacancy rates?

Unless you are trying to imply that port workers and chemical plant workers office out of Class A space in gleaming new towers, I am not sure I get where you are heading with your rebuttal.

[HarryMoto]

Here's the link to Steve Brown today:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...n1.31c3f25.html

[tierwestah]

Here's the link to Steve Brown today:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...n1.31c3f25.html

HA! This is exactly what we've been saying all along. All these new tennants moving outside the CBD are hurting the MArket for the CBD. And i don't care how you guys try to put it, whether if its 50 ft walking distance, .5 miles, or a train ride away, it's still not in the CBD. Victory will be nice BUT, it will be at the expense of downtown Dallas.

Meanwhile in Houston, we can sit back and enjoy our new park, Park Tower, and Houston Pavilion rise. Oh and did i mention all that will be inside of the CBD? Also, in the upcoming years we can watch our own version of Victory-style development just north of the CBD at Hardy Rail Yards and an Intermodal station!

[Willy1]

^^^ You might want to read the article again (this time without so much pro-Houston, anti-Dallas bias) and maybe you won't miss the point they're making. Yes, the new construction is taking away from the older 80's 'scrapers. That happens in any city where they build a new building. That's not Dallas-only phenomenon. It's all part of the commecial real estate life cycle. If they built a new 50 story tower in Houston tomorrow, some of the tennants of the larger, older, buildings would want to move into the newer space. It's just human nature to want to reside in the newest and most prestigious buildings. Even in NYC, when they built the World Trade Center in the late 60's tennants abandoned their long-time spaces to move into the new towers. Life cycle!

And, yes, right now uptown is outside the CBD... but the point this article was making was that in the 50's Southland and Republic Bank towers were outside the CBD too... but they expanded the CBD, they didn't remain outside the CBD thus hurting DT Dallas... Then came the buildings along Ross Ave.... they too expanded the CBD.... And now we have Uptown. Uptown is outside the CBD now - but like the CBD expansions of the 50's and 70's, Uptown too is likely to be considered part of the CBD before it's all said and done. The reason for that is not because some powerful real estate tycoon somewhere makes a decision and "presto" it's not CBD. It's all about public perception. When they built the buildings in the 50's and 70's and they were outside CBD, it didn't take long before the public perception of those areas lumped them in with "Downtown". Same thing will eventually happen with Uptown. As it grows taller and visually becomes indistinguisable from the traditional DT Dallas Skyline, it too will start being referred to as "downtown". And, once they cover Woodall Rogers with the park connecting uptown to downtown the line between the two will become even more fuzzy. That too is part of the life cycle of a downtown... it grows both vertically and outwardly - if lucky - in spurts. If a city is really lucky, the downtown area grows both vertically and horizontally at the same time... but usually only in periods of boom. Dallas and Houston have both enjoyed such growth over the past few decades and both will probably continue the upward and outward growth for a while... Other cities such as Fort Worth and San Antonio have enjoyed much larger population gains recently without much added height to the CBD's.

Anyway, this article is not nearly as negative for Dallas as some would like for it to be. It is more about the changing climate in Dallas than some sort of wishful CBD evactuation in DT Dallas. Plus, the redevelopment projects in DT Dallas right now are at an all time high. A year or two from now as these projects are finished DT Dallas will be a very different market than it is today. Dallas is in a period of "repositioning" right now. Once the night life in DT Dallas kicks in, things will be very different.

[Captain Impossible]

HA! This is exactly what we've been saying all along. All these new tennants moving outside the CBD are hurting the MArket for the CBD. And i don't care how you guys try to put it, whether if its 50 ft walking distance, .5 miles, or a train ride away, it's still not in the CBD. Victory will be nice BUT, it will be at the expense of downtown Dallas.

Meanwhile in Houston, we can sit back and enjoy our new park, Park Tower, and Houston Pavilion rise. Oh and did i mention all that will be inside of the CBD? Also, in the upcoming years we can watch our own version of Victory-style development just north of the CBD at Hardy Rail Yards and an Intermodal station!

Didn't they just cut all the residential out of the Pavilion project?

[Gary]

I can't believe you guy's are still arguing about this.

[Houston 79]

Houston's little project that's trying immulate what Dallas is doing can't even compare to what Victory Park will be when it is built out.

Well, the truth hurts. I went to the Victory Park website www.victorypark.com , and it was very impressive. Houston could only hope to have something this cool one day. I'm still optimistic for H-Town.

[Gary]

Why can't we all admit that Dallas blows Houston away? Dallas has no negatives, Houston has a plethora of them. Dallas is clean and perfectly laid out, while Houston is a giant quagmire on all sides. Dallas has giving and understanding people, Houston has sadistic, arrogant and mean people.

Finally.... Dallas has the Dubai like Victory project, while Houston has it's measly little Downtown projects. Now nothing more needs to be said.

[C2H]

OK forgive me for playing moderator, but we should try to keep this discussion a little civilized and not revert back to the same ol' rivalry stuff. This discussion is interesting to see how each project will have an impact on each of the downtowns. But people who register with the name "dallas is better than houston" aren't looking for anything but trouble.

And to the new poster(s) that just joined today in attempt to start a flamewar.... hmmm..... maybe make it a little less obivious that you could be the same person and not join only 11 minutes apart next time. Just a tip.

[TexasStar]

^

Don't get bent out of shape because of obviously provocative comments.

I wouldn't be surprised if this same nut job signed in as Houston79 to amen his own post.

Just ignore him, Gary.

[tierwestah]

Didn't they just cut all the residential out of the Pavilion project?

Just having a little bit of fun. Don't be so jumpy!

But to all you Dallas posters who seem to have it twisted that the downtown residential market isn't doing well, read this article. The developers themselves stated themselves that the project was too pricey because of the underground parking issue. Read it and weep Dallasites.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nb/hei...ws/4339978.html

[C2H]

^

Don't get bent out of shape because of obviously provocative comments.

I wouldn't be surprised if this same nut job signed in as Houston79 to amen his own post.

Just ignore him, Gary.

you're right, but i wasn't getting out of shape. I was just trying to get the discussion back on track before a mod stepped in and closed it down. I just suspected that the poster(s) who were trying to provoke a Dallas VS Houston flame war was clearly the same guy. Also the fact that the Dallas Votes were only 35 last night and they jumped all the way up to 45 in less than 2 hours. Not that people can't like the Dallas Victory project but it just seemed like too drastic of an increase in a short period of time.

[houstonfella]

Why can't we all admit that Dallas blows Houston away? Dallas has no negatives, Houston has a plethora of them. Dallas is clean and perfectly laid out, while Houston is a giant quagmire on all sides. Dallas has giving and understanding people, Houston has sadistic, arrogant and mean people.

Finally.... Dallas has the Dubai like Victory project, while Houston has it's measly little Downtown projects. Now nothing more needs to be said.

Comparing Dallas to Dubai. Get real. When Dallas gets a skyscraper taller than Houston, let us know. Until then, Houston is only one of four U.S. cities with 2+ million people. Dallas blows Houston away. Could be. Those winds we had the other day came from Dallas. It was master-minded by Dallasites. I just know it. Dallas .... grow up!