rantanamo

The Woodlands is someplace that people in Austin and Dallas know about. And envy. It's one of the few hip things about Houston's residential communities.

No. The Woodlands is the latest smaller example of Plano, Frisco, Irving, Richardson, Arlington that suck the life out of the main city by having more sales tax cap to offer corporate tax incentives to corporations looking for cheap new homes. Slap a mall or two, an urban center or two and a large corporate base like Irving or Plano and you're now the ruination of a region and a major component of sprawl and traffic encouragement. Then, when the next, hot Plano comes along next door, ie Frisco, and sucks the life out you, you start the rallying cry for regional cooperation and raising sales tax caps. There's right now a huge movement in the metroplex to raise the state sales tax cap to bring in more services like rail. The Irvings and Planos of the world are wanting things done faster for competition's sake vs the new big Burbs like Frisco, McKinney and new Metroplex corporate player Westlake. This is what Houston should not allow for the health of your region and city.

Why hasn't Frisco lobbied to have their soccer team named after...Frisco? Imagine the PR value! After all, they are no different than the Arlington Rangers and Irving-soon to be Arlington-Cowboys. I'd grab the glory of being the home base of these teams instead of abdicating it to a place they don't exist: Dallas.

Exactly. They love to make jabs at the more wealthy residents in Dallas proper. Truth is they are just looking for a conservative haven where they don't have to pay for actual services. You could still be part of the major city and have your own school district if you please. You just want different property tax, don't want to pay for public transit and want someone else to link larger projects for you. Then you use that extra tax space to lure companies away from the city with ridiculous tax incentives that will kill your city in 20 years. Houston, please don't make Dallas' mistake. Annex all the land that you can. Who cares what the SSC and SSP crowd say, its is the regionally responsible thing to do. I wish Dallas could annex all of Dallas County. It could stop this ridiculous DART pandering and tax incentive war we're having up here. DART can't even build the way it should because you have 50 suburban municipalities pulling at them with a me first mentality. You can't even get a company to locate in Dallas proper because you have every suburban business center trying to become the next 1,000,000 person city with big business throwing tax incentives at them(interesting because people supposedly move to a Frisco to get away, yet they are trying to build large urban areas) in the name of being in "Dallas". I'm totally pro annexation.

You must be thinking of football. This is basketball. Any team worth their salt has already played a couple of name schools already and will play more before conference play begins.

what's wrong with you guys? Seriously?

Death trap = having to slow down to make a simple turn, cars behind you can't see causing many sideswipes and rear enders, tall vehicles rolls onto another vehicle.

in the era of the SUV, road fatalities are at an all-time high.

will say it for the last time.

HP is more akin to the whole Mercantile dealy in Dallas. Not exactly, but that's what it is most like. Victory is more like your Hardy Yards.

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.

Oh, I think we really do get it; quite well in fact.

1. One Main Place (at 1201 Main Street) is "isolated from almost everything downtown"? Is that what you meant to say? How can that be so? It appears to be fairly near the middle of downtown, just a couple blocks from Bank of America. And Hooters only 2 blocks away from the new building; and no doubt within walking distance of the new W Hotel. Well, Yee Haw. You guys are developing quite the cosmopolitan little neighborhood up there, aren't you? ;-) No one has ever said Uptown (and Victory) are not close to downtown, and you'll no doubt have some people walking to Hooters for lunch, but the fact remains, they are not downtown Dallas, and they are sucking tenants out of downtown Dallas. That cannot be good for downtown Dallas.

blah, blah blah. What I mean is One Main Place is isolated from what we consider the core of downtown and all of the new fangled development and renovations. Its no closer to the West End than Victory. Reality. I see where you got of on a bashing tangent. Great argument. Deal in facts.

2. No, Dallas is not Houston. But the same market issues apply. The only difference is that more (but by no means all) of downtown Houston's competition is within the city limits. So what? I'll grant you the small "victory" of keeping development in the city proper, rather than in Farmers Branch etc. But that doesn't take away from the fact that it will still hurt downtown Dallas.

This is why I say that you don't get it. The same market issues don't apply. When a business builds in the Houston area, there is simply less competition within your region for office space. The vast majority of which is in the city of Houston. Dallas does not have that luxury.

Why is it important to stay in the city limits of Dallas?

- tax monies(If the firm goes to Las Colinas Dallas possibly doesn't get new fangled Victory building and its taxes

- employee exposure to Dallas proper

- businesses host clients from all over. Again, exposure and monies to Dallas proper. Example. Client from Cali is looking to relocate, I'd rather have them near the West End, and staying at the W than trouncing around the Four Seasons or Mandalay in Las Colinas.

Why is it important to keep them in DTD proximity

- Use of downtown business, by bus, car train, walking or whatever

- Increased rail and bus ridership, gives more monies to DART and increases Dallas allocation of projects

- exposure to DTD

- people in proximity use business. I work in Uptown on McKinney Ave. Despite the percieved distance from the downtown core, we find ourselves eating downtown at least 3 days a week. We can drive. We can bus(#21), we can trolley, we can rail downtown. Victory is a lot closer to DTD than we are. I imagine people in this building will be at places like Stephen Pyles all the time.

3. I understand that Dallas, as a city, does not have complete control over developers. (I recognize there are some posters who seem to think otherwise, but I am not among them.) But another thing one constantly sees on this board is the belief that Dallas, as a city, does have much more control over developers than does Houston, as a city, due to the "Z" word. I have personally always thought that the impact of no-zoning on Houston's development patterns is wildly exaggerated, but many posters, including Dallas posters, seem to think otherwise.

Zoning gives control over what type and some specifics of how and what a development can be. That gives control to say, well in this area(Victory for example) you can have setbacks of this distance, this percentage of groundspace must be mixed-use, this height can be built, etc, etc. It has a huge impact in the sense, that a State-Thomas, West Village or Victory would be impossible to do in Houston with multiple developers coming into an area. For example, the area where I work is lined with taller buildings, surrounded by midrise apt and condo buildings, then surrounded by townhomes a little further out. That would be harder to do in Houston, thus in Dallas we have areas like this in Uptown, Turtle Creeks, West Village, etc, where you aren't just having skylines pop-up, but well infilled areas. You're also having more likelihood of a Bryan Place popping up, because you have to build according to that zoning.

Again, I don't think competing for leases is a different ballgame in Dallas at all. Houston has the same situation of many different office centers competing to host businesses and law firms, etc. Whether they are inside or outside the city limits is really not terribly relevant, because, as you have noted, the cities do not control the developers, nor do the cities control the tenants.

Completely different ballgame. As Houston's suburbs develop to the point of the Planos, Irvings and Friscos of the world, you will see that difference in the two current markets. Its not a bash on Houston. I wish DFW suburbs were more like Houston's at this stage.

To say that it makes no difference if its within a given city limits is just ridiculous for reasons explained before. Its a bloodbath up here for everything from amusement parks, sports venues, large scale events, to leasing tenants in Class A office space. Such things create tax base and revenues to support other development. Cities like Frisco and McKinney are out to be the 3rd city in the metroplex. No joke. I'd put Dallas as more like LA than Houston in that sense. There are business centers all over southern Cali. Competition is fierce.

As RedScare said above, without Victory, it is very doubtful that H&B would have moved to Plano or Frisco. They would have stayed in or near downtown. It's a rather sad statement of the condition of downtown Dallas that the choice as you put it seems to be whether to move to Uptown or Frisco/Plano (with a move out of downtown seeminly presumed). Is downtown Dallas really that bad?

And this is where it really gets off. To say that wouldn't move to Plano, Frisco, Richardson, Las Colinas, Farmers Branch, Addison or Westlake is simply ignorance to the DFW market. There are hundreds of examples of the northern migration in DFW. Everytime a lease is up in DTD or Uptown, the rumors begin to swirl about a move to newer, CHEAPER space up north, with more parking, and closer to "Prosper schools" or "country living"

So, in the end, I think we (or at least I) actually do understand the situation quite well. I have never said Victory was bad for the city of Dallas as a whole or that it was bad for the D-FW area. Only that it is bad for downtown Dallas. On that point, neither you nor anyone else has provided any reason to think otherwise. I've never read of a company saying DTD was horrible. I've read, cool new office space. CHEAPER office space, closer to DFW Airport. I think as said before, a lot is the proximity to the Southern Sector and just DFW suburban ignorance(yes, we are ignorant up here). Thankfully, my company is talking of moving to or closer to downtown. And no downtown is not bad. Its just not as shiny and new as other places. The construction has slowly crept south though, and we have two office buildings under construction.

Recognize.

Why non-Dallasites really don't get it:

1.) This new building is as close to the West End as One Main Place(which is isolated from almost everything downtown in its own right). I'm sure some map stat about the mileage is about to come out without you realizing that Hooters and the White Swan building and others are two blocks from this building and are very much part of the West End

2.) This is not Houston. Anything "intown" in Dallas competes with office space in other municipalities. Not just other skylines in Dallas. If this firm was looking to relocate within the metroplex, it would have the choice of the Preston Center area, Anywhere along Central Expressway, the Galleria area, Park Central or Far North within the city of Dallas. Then, outside of Dallas proper, in the metroplex, you'd be battling with Addison, Farmers Branch, Nor Tel Corridor, Las Colinas, Fort Worth, West Plano or Frisco for prime class A office space. It is always a victory to have an entity within Dallas proper, let alone one on the outskirts of downtown.

3.) Dallas as a city, does not have any control over developers. They can offer incentives or provide partnerships at most, but they don't control. You'd never understand that reading these boards.

I'm not being a cheerleader about this, but I just don't think the above is understood enough. Competing for leases is simply a different ballgame in DFW. Without Victory(City of Dallas wanted this in the Farmers Market area, see how much influence they had) this firm is likely in one of the new towers in West Plano or Frisco.

Victory did not develop around a rail stop. A "special events" stop was created at AAC to serve the arena, not the other way around. Plano Station is located next to "Historic Downtown Plano". Once again, downtown was there first, though a fairly large apartment complex has since been built that may qualify as TOD. As for Park Lane Station, my understanding is that North Park Mall was there awhile before the DART station was added to serve it. There may be some other development that can be attributed to DART, but most of the development at Park Lane is likely because of the mall.

Mockingbird is very much a TOD, as there was virtually nothing there prior to DART.

OK Mr Dallas. I'll play. TOD = transit oriented development. Not transit only. Not specifically built only for transit. It conotes convenience to a station. It takes advantage of and is spurred on by the long-term stability of a rail station. It doesn't have to be nothing, then something after the rail. It simply has to be oriented for transit. This is why a Victory can be used as an example. I don't say it is...........YET. A hospital can be an example if its oriented for transit and takes advantage of that stability.

Current TODs in DFW:

Eastside STATION in Plano

Mockingbird Station

Cityplace West/West Village(Trolley and Light Rail oriented)

U/C or announced(bare with me on the names) that are definites with heavy DART mention in their releases. All are mixed-use, multi-family, urban style developments:

2 Galytyn Park developments in Richardson

Park Lane Place

Downtown Garland Project(at moved rail station)

Lake Highland Town Center(new blue line station)

Baylor Station area development(name escapes me)

Mosaic and Republic tower renovations

Mark Cuban's condo building in the Cedars

Former Merryvale(Now owned by Jefferson at the West End Station)

Cityville Southwest

DT Farmers Branch Station

DT Carrolton Station

I believe there are others I'm to lazy to dig up. Needless to say, with the huge multi-family deficit Dallas is facing, there is a lot coming near these stations. Dallas will take on a much different feel at its rail nodal points when the new lines open in 2009. I think the most immediate development impact will be in the Deep Ellum/Baylor Hospital area.

Dallas and her existing and planned rail lines are impressive. I just don't understand how Dallas got funding though. How did you guys? Pass some help down here. 45 miles of light rail with 60,000 daily riders and Dallas is getting more funding. Houston 7.5 miles of light rail and 30,000+ riders and our leaders are still running around in circles about where and how rail should be placed.

Dallas got funding, because DART really plans well for the future, and has continued to meet its ridership numbers year after year. DART rail hasn't even reached its most populous corridor yet, nor has its current rail line population reached urban maturity. Most of the system's miles are still suburn, low density areas. I liken it more to Toronto's system than anything else(bare with me) as it will become more and more nodal(Large TOD development around each station) like Toronto. That's a future I like for a larger suburban city that will never become a Manhattan. DART can see that vision, and they connect the area with that vision and need. Not to mention their underrated political saavy. All I know is, the system is working no matter what the numbers may say( I really have no clue what they say).

So not paying $425 million to Jerry Jones and still getting the hotel patrons from his events = Bad Dallas? Sorry, but Arlington did the rest of the metroplex a huge favor by footing the bill on that crazy political move Jerry was trying to make.

SMH @ looking for quotes by the mayor of Dallas to the City of Dallas to make fun of.

Boy has this forum come full circle. Now you're arguing with each other about Dallas.

nothing in Dallas can sniff greatness

This is the fan base that claims UT was overrated last year. Your fans are not loyal, so please stop this. Place like Arkie(hate to admit that), bama, South Carolina even, sell out those places, good or bad. I really don't care what your record is. You aren't selling out your place. Who's to say A&M ever gets to the promised land or even top of the Big XII South again? There is no gurantee. Just like there's no gurantee that UT ever wins. The stadium needs expansion now, so its happening now. Has nothing to do with Kyle or A&M or whomever. Again, sell out your place on a regular basis for a few years, then worry about expansion.

As for those record, Kyle was bigger, you SHOULD have the records up until this year. Sounds like the Chinese bragging about having the most this or that. You have 1.5 billion people. You should be the #1 economic power just by rolling out of bed. Why are you bragging about surpassing Germany or GB?

I think A&M needs to sell out what they have now on a regular basis before worrying about expanding. UT simply needs to. They've sold out a ton of games consecutively and now is the time for expansion.

As for the A&M game in SA, I'd bet Army had a lot better turnout than Rice did. A lot of audience shots revealed lots of Army personel in addition to the Cadets from West Point.

Dallas will likely move to No 8 by next census. It has only fallen from a brief stint at 8, back to number 9 where it was before.

But dispite SA being "noticeably" poorer, the inner city just seems to work out a little harmony. This might be ignorance, But I never recall any big racial/social class problems in San Antonio. Perhaps they have learned to get along?

Despite what we think of as diversity, you have to remember that SA is not a super diverse city. I would not expect there to be as many social conflict problems.

to say there's nothing to do in downtown Dallas is a little ridiculous. Exactly what did you want to do? And could you not simply hop on the train to do more outside of downtown if it was boring?

Rugby is not more violent than football. You're telling me two unpadded people running into each other is less violent than a head on collision between two cars?

And we do have the best basketball and baseball. I'm pretty sure you follow sports, and you know the difference between the NBA's best and the team we sent to the world championships. I'm sure you understand how the real MLB all-stars go to Japan each year and whoop up on Japan. I'm sure you can search google and see there are professional football leagues all over the world.

AND FOR GOODNESS SAKES, even in Latin America many refer to the US as America. You're reading a little too much into silly media iterations. One could find these anywhere.

World Championship of Basketball? One that doesn't include who they don't want and has to have invited teams to qualify based on meaningless exhibitions? Formula 1 deems itself a world circuit even back in its beginnings, when it was until very recently and the boring tracks, a mostly European championship? Then they crown their driver as winning the world driver's championship? Nevermind the hundreds of other circuits. GB's constant claims of things being the world's greatest, world's biggest, etc, etc.

[sarcasm]Yep, no execs, HQs, regional offices or any auxillaries to such industry will happen. They just sit there and happen upon themselves, run themselves, and spur nothing. That's why there is nothing in Houston[sarcasm]

as Alliance has shown, such facilities are booms to white collar and executive auxillaries. Houston should know this very well.

I don't understand your statement RedScare. You make it as if there is a Port or not a port and nothing else to speak of. You have some things, we(Dallas) have others. This has led to a "tie" in the terms that tamtagon is speaking. Its a simple hypothesis(true or not true, who knows) that adding an industry to Dallas that is now not such a major player in its region and making it one of the biggest will add something tangible in the sense of the dollar. I believe that's all tamtagon is trying to say. Again, if you want an example, look at your own city or a smaller complex like Alliance and what it means to white collar exec type jobs.

mall theaters are making a comeback with AMC leading the charge. I can think of Firewheel, Stonebriar, Valley View and Northpark all with spanking new, large AMC multiplexes. All, pretty spectacular.

no such thing as better or worse weather. Some people actually love really cold, and lots of snow. Some love heat. I think the main thing you hear people talk about with Houston is humidity, not heat. I've never personally heard someone complain about Houston heat vs Dallas. Only the humidity and mosquitos.

Running quarterbacks are great for High school and to a large extent college, they are not however designed to work in the pro's. The pro's have made attempts at using them, but in the long haul they don't work. The NFL is much faster, much more talented, and generally doesn't rely on one star player to win championships, thus a running QB can actually neutralize the talent base of a team.

As far as O lineman protecting running quarterbacks, it's almost an oxymoron. Players like Vick often outrun there lineman, versus waiting on them before making there way downfield, this is vudu in the NFL.

Again, the NFL is a whole other ball of wax in talent and speed, and for anyone who's waiting on a running QB to win a Super Bowl, you'll probably be waiting a long time.

I think too many people have this idea that a qb has to be a running or throwing qb OR that you can't win with a running qb.

a.) There is no such thing as a running qb. There are qbs that are fast and can run. There are qbs that run option offenses. A good QB like Steve McNair got the ridiculous label as a running qb coming out of college because he could run. Nevermind the passing offense he played in at Alcorn.

b.) To say guys that can run or run more often or are better scramblers don't work over the long haul is ridiculous. I could name many many many more guys who prefer the pocket and aren't as athletic who won nothing. Why is Steve Young not considered as a runner? Roger Staubach? Fran Tarkenton? Donovan McNabb? Randall Cunningham? Winning the Superbowl is not the ONLY measure of a winning qb. Guys like that won/have won for years.

c.) As far as qbs outrunning lineman, if they don't understand this, they aren't that good of football players in the first place. But if you want an example of when a qb needs some mobility just look at Drew Bledsoe. That guy needs to run some times.

In conclusion, if you're waiting on a so-called running qb to win a Superbowl, you've missed out on the illustrious history of the NFL and are too busy trying to praise the pocket sitting of the Tom Brady's of the world. Winning in the NFL is about execution, no matter how you do it. Not about how you play a position. If you do what YOU do well, within a good scheme and is well executed

Interesting to read this thread. The Gaylord Texan in Grapevine is doing great business. Many in Dallas don't exactly love the concept, but its just another attraction to add to North Texas tourism. The place itself is excellent and is doing big time convention business. If this happens, worry about your downtown convention center.

To answer an earlier question, the Gaylord Texan has an adjacent golf course. The thing is already expanding, and you have a couple of other similar resorts also being built along the shore of Lake Grapevine. I would have thought this type of resort would show up in Galveston.

I think most people get their idea of the Dallas landscape from DFW airport area and the northern I-35E area. I guess you could put downtown and Uptown into that as well. Most of Dallas doesn't look like these areas. There are a lot more areas that look like Lakewood or North Oak Cliff than the flat shrub prairie to the west.

If you're middle class, can you live in River Oaks because you want to? To put it into Houston terms. Land prices are going wild and that the way it is. I'm not well off and can't afford it. I won't be losing any sleep. There are options elsewhere like The Cedars, downtown or east Dallas if one wants something more urban and more affordable. That Platinum Corridor strip is simply just a long long stretch of wealth.