Jump to content


- - - - -

Residential Condo Construction Boom!


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#51 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 554 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 29 June 2005 - 06:15 AM

I agree with Johnny that comparing FW to Dallas is a bit unfair because of the size difference of the two cities. However, FW isn't really competing with Sacramento, Charolotte or even Austin really... But, because of our location 30 miles away from Dallas, we are competing with Big D for development. Why would The Ritz build here if there is already one in Dallas? Why would Azure be built in FW, when they're already building in Dallas... Why would the NFL give FW a team when they'd have to compete with THE Dallas Cowboys? Arlington already has the Rangers and now the Cowboys - so we missed that boat. Dallas has the Mavs and Stars so I don't see us getting a NHL or NBA team. Get the picture?

Sure, we have nice museums and a world class zoo. I'm not saying that FW is void of anything greater than Dallas has. I agree that our Modern, and the Kimbell, both out-class any musuem in Dallas. And, I personally think the Bass is better than the Meyerson. I think the Colonial is better than The Byron Nelson. I think that Sundance Square is better than West End. FW does out-do Dallas on a lot of things. But I'm specifically talking about NEW DEVELOPMENTS and the fact that Dallas continues to opperate with a "build it and they will come" mentality and FW continues to function in the "we'll just wait and see" mentality. How does FW stack up against Dallas in terms of design industry? Where is our World Trade Center and Market Center? How does our Farmers Market compare to Dallas'? How does our light rail system compare to Dallas'? Shopping - does anyone think that Ridgmar or Hulen Malls come anywhere close to the Galleria or NorthPark? Where is our Market Center complex? My point is this - FW should be doing more to compete with cities like Dallas. Sure, they're twice the size of FW, but why not aim high? This is Texas after all and things are supposed to be bigger here - right? I think the one thing we have going for us - if it ever really happens - is the Trinity River Vision in FW stands a chance of really pushing FW to the next level.

Sure, we have had a couple new developments in the last couple years - Pier 1, Radio Shack, The Tower, etc. And, those are all nice. But, we haven't had the grand-scale development that normally comes with the type of growth FW is experiencing, especially given that our downtown office space is maxed out. Austin - a city that has basically stopped growing - has recently announced a few new towers - major developments.

Is it possible that developers are waiting to see what happens with the TRV before they make final decisions to build in FW? Could they be holding off plans to build big things now so that they can be part of the TRV future of FW? If so, then that would make me feel a little better. However, the TRV is a ways off and things that are a ways off sometimes never end up happening...

And, whatever happened to the big announcement surrounding the redevelopment of the T&P Warehouse - wasn't that announcement supposed to be made last summer? It just sits there dark and abandoned - and one of the most visible buildings in the city as people from the East drive through downtown.

Okay, enough moaning from me. I'm going to put my "the cup is half full" t-shirt back on.

#52 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,303 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 29 June 2005 - 08:22 AM

I wonder if Sid Bass sits around griping about not having as much money as Michael Dell? That would be pretty silly.

Do you see what I'm saying?

This city is a lot like a person. It has its own personality, it's own look, it's own strengths and weaknesses. You can change so many things about yourself, but you can't really change who you are. And besides, I like who we are. I think this place is great. It would be a shame to be so worried about our pace of development relative to that of Dallas that we couldn't enjoy the things going on here.

Personally I really enjoyed watching Pier1, The Tower, and Radio Shack go up. Right now I like watching what's going on at the Baker building, T&P and Montgomery Plaza. And I never get tired of looking at the courthouse, the Blackstone, and one of my favorites, the Plaza Hotel (Ft. Worth Chophouse, sure it's small, but I think it's cool).

If there wasn't a Dallas 30 minutes away, we'd all be patting ourselves on the back for what a great city we live in. There is some really cool stuff on the horizon. Reclaiming Lancaster, TRV, Trinity Bluff, Convention Center Hotel, XTO, TCC, Tandy, Transport Life, and on and on. What's not to like?

#53 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 29 June 2005 - 09:28 AM

There is much to love about FW and the metroplex. Quality does precede quantity here. However, claiming the Modern as classier than any other museum in the metroplex is debatable. Very nice place, but is the same old stuff every time I go. The Ancient Asia/Orient exhibit in Dallas will probably trump the one done here at Kimbell in 2001, though I appreciate the Kimbell more than the Modern. Make any sense?

Look, both have well respected charms in art/cultural institutions, so both should receive equal billing, ala Ron Chapman. The Bass PH architectually outshines the Meyerson IMHO, but the shows "guest performed" at the M put Dallas in a different class. Though I hate to admit it.

What is to stop Dallas from constructing a new performace hall? I don't know, but their momentum will surely decide.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#54 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,420 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 29 June 2005 - 12:46 PM

What is to stop Dallas from constructing a new performace hall? I don't know, but their momentum will surely decide.

View Post


I believe they're pretty far into the planning phase of a new performance hall.

#55 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 29 June 2005 - 02:38 PM

Anyways, as for:

What is to stop Dallas from constructing a new performace hall? I don't know, but their momentum will surely decide.


Answer

The Winspear Opera House, Wyly Theater, Booker T. Washington Arts Magnet expansion and new Dallas Theater Center are all scheduled to begin construction in 2006. Here's a little look at them. Totally different than what this region/state has ever seen so many find them too radical. I just think its a different kind of architecture. Beautiful in their own way, though I'm not a fan of the "borg cube. I can appreciate it as something unique. Sorry about the sizes.

Wyly Theater(Thankfully the environment will be much different)
Posted Image

Winspear Opera House(neighbor to the Meyerson)
Posted Image
here's another link that shows the final rendering and interior. You can find it under location -> US.
http://www.fosterand...Site/Flash.html

You also have One Arts Plaza(7-11 HQ and possible 2,3,4 and 5 Arts Plaza),the Lone Star tower site(parking structure next to the Wyly) that has the rumor of a 30 story tower going up over the parking structure, the new tower and plaza for the Catheral de San Guadalupe on the east side of Pearl. On the west, the old Arts District Tower site seems to be shopping developers, as well as the (seen by some forumers) Hunt office tower and the inevitable expansion of the DMA to fit its new huge donation.

Here's a link to our forum discussing it, as well as maps of the ambitious Arts District Plan that looks like it will become reality, plus there are new projects
http://forum.dallasm...t=Arts District

#56 Yossarian

Yossarian

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 517 posts

Posted 29 June 2005 - 04:51 PM

Wyly Theater? Gag!

Opera house is a little better - but still fairly unimaginative.

#57 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 29 June 2005 - 04:55 PM

Willy,

I understand. I suspect the answer lies in the expecations and the perception of risk on the part of the development community. I truly don't understand why there isn't a greater number of people in the Fort Worth community who are engaged in the city's development. I imagine that is because it takes years - really decades for cities' identities to change in the minds of out-of-towners.

Our city is very misunderstood by people out of town. This presents an abundance of opportunity for thos of us who DO understand it to craft the city's growth in a positive way. It is entirely possible for individuals to make a difference in a city this size. If you regularly support good, local businesses and cultural institutions and if you encourage other smart, interesting, passionate people to come live and work here, you (one person) can make a significant impact.

Also, helping clear up the distinction between FW and Dal is, IMO, a positive for the city's investment climate as oftentimes out of town investors actually think that when they invest in Dallas that such a move actually covers FW. Why? Because it serves Dallas companies to claim they can "serve" the FW market from thier office - you know, "no need to hire someone over in FW - just give the bidness to us..."

Real estate dev is an entrepreneurial business. We shouldn't wait to "get another" project of various sorts, but actually go out and do something about it.

#58 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 30 June 2005 - 01:04 AM

Wyly Theater? Gag!

Opera house is a little better - but still fairly unimaginative.


Can think of a lot of words, but unimaginative never came up. I can't really think of anything like it. If you followed the link, you read about the heat filtering glass and saw the interior. Outstanding asset to the state. Glad it will be built

As for the Wyly, that was my first reaction too. After seeing a little of the architect's work, I can see that the rendering isn't projecting the building all that well. Just think of a building with the infrastructure exposed to the outside. The outside then, is a metal mesh. From some angles you can see the escalators, AC units, etc. From other angles, it looks like a big shiny cube.

Even if I don't like them, I am proud they will be built. I forgot to mention the Woodall Rodgers Deck Park adjacent to this. It looks very good that the funds will be raised with the freed money's from a couple of adjacent TIFs

BTW, another tower is looking good to go up. St. Anne's. There should be a nice skyline across Woodall in a couple of years.

Posted Image

#59 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 30 June 2005 - 02:41 AM

That stuf happenin in Dallas is forwardly progressive and AWESOME. The Quality aspect is sure to accompany it's garnered respect in DT developments on a national scale. Wish DTFW could invest in a performing arts center for the youth in a DT locale.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#60 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 30 June 2005 - 07:43 AM

You guys in Fort Worth have been much more fortunate with private investments to your Arts, DT and culture than Dallas. We used to have threads all the time wishing that some of the Dallas elite would invest in the same way there has been investment in DTFW. The Nasher, new DMA donations, Wyly and Winspear, Woodall Rodgers Park and Margaret Bridges are examples of that finally happening. So when you guys complain, realize that Dallas is just catching up with you guys in many aspects, mainly that kind of private investment. Its just part of the recent development craze that will totally change the look and feel of inner-city Dallas by 2010.

BTW, I think we will get another announcement for the West Village/Cityplace area very soon. For those that know that area of Uptown, they are digging for core samples at Hank Haney. Have to say that if that area gets anywhere near the masterplan, I might have to favor it over Victory.

#61 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 01 July 2005 - 04:42 PM

I agree with Johnny that comparing FW to Dallas is a bit unfair because of the size difference of the two cities. However, FW isn't really competing with Sacramento, Charolotte or even Austin really... But, because of our location 30 miles away from Dallas, we are competing with Big D for development. Why would The Ritz build here if there is already one in Dallas?  Why would Azure be built in FW, when they're already building in Dallas... Why would the NFL give FW a team when they'd have to compete with THE Dallas Cowboys? Arlington already has the Rangers and now the Cowboys - so we missed that boat. Dallas has the Mavs and Stars so I don't see us getting a NHL or NBA team. Get the picture?

View Post



Willy,

Fort Worth and Dallas are different cities and different "markets". If a tourist/biz traveler is visiting Fort Worth, they will likely want to stay here. If they are visting Dallas, they will likely look for a hotel there. A new Ritz in Fort Worth would not cannibalize a Ritz in Dallas. Granted, someone from out of state might not realize this. Often promoters of economic development in Dallas have been able to convince out of state investors (e.g. someone building a new hotel or opening a new regional office) that a Dallas location can serve Fort Worth. It is to Dallas' benefit to convince people of this - to claim us under its umbrella if you will.

There are some notable exceptions to this (businesses that will only have one location in each region of the nation).

Find this annoying, insulting, or simply plane wrong? I do. What to do to remedy this? Do your business with local firms - if not locally (in Fort Worth - not just anywhere in North Texas) then with the Fort Worth branch of a national or regional firm.

An example is architectural services. If you want to help foster a thriving architectural community in Fort Worth, hire an existing Fort Worth architect or - if you've found someone from out of town that is really talented and you want to use them, encourage them to move here. If you say nothing, they won't consider it. If you do, it will at least be on thier mind for consideration to create a presence here - to bring more talented, creative professionals to our city.

#62 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 01 July 2005 - 04:50 PM

That stuf happenin in Dallas is forwardly progressive and AWESOME. The Quality aspect is sure to accompany it's garnered respect in DT developments on a national scale. Wish DTFW could invest in a performing arts center for the youth in a DT locale.

View Post


Re: quality of the developments in Dallas to which you referred.

- In the cases of the museums - yes - they appear to be doing a great job of hiring world-class architects to build an impressive set of arts venues. The buildings should be fantastic, although I think their "arts district" will lack the feeling of a real place upon completion. It will be a series of sculpture-like buildings, each meatn to be viewed in a vacuum, from afar, rather than to work well together.
This is the new-urbanist in me talking. (not that I favor revivalist or neo-traditionalism, but I think the pedestrian friendliness and urban planning element of New Urbanism has great merit).

- However, in many cases the developments in Dallas are pure garbage. Ex: their high-rise residential. They appear to use very cheap, poor materials, and to have very ostentatious, tasteless architecture on par w/ that seen in Vegas. I am thinking of the series of cheesy projects built along Turtle Creek over the last few years. I'd be embarrassed if any of those had been built in Fort Worth. Its a sign of naive taste. Many people find it impressive because it is so overtly expensive-looking. Again, this supports one of the core values that the Dallas community appears to hold sacred: overt, highly-visible symbols of wealth.

#63 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 01 July 2005 - 09:42 PM

I'll bite my tongue on this one.


I'd just like to know what Dallas was supposed to build. What styles, etc would have not been embarrassing to Fort Worth and what isn't pure garbage?

#64 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 01 July 2005 - 10:20 PM

I'll bite my tongue on this one.

I'd just like to know what Dallas was supposed to build.  What styles, etc would have not been embarrassing to Fort Worth and what isn't pure garbage?

View Post


There are at least two high rise condo projects around Turtle Creek in Dallas that appear to use cheap (maybe dryvit) stucco, and way overkill the details that would indicate "this is an expensive place". The ones built in the 70s and 80s seemed as though the architecture was a total afterthought - they are bland (e.g. the buildings with plane ribbon glass and tan aggregate spandrels) The condos built in the last 7 years are the ones that I was criticizing earlier as silly and tasteless. For them the architecture is nothing more than a gimmick - part of the marketing "concept" - meant to conjure images of foreign lands (apparently that connotes expense and desirability to some) but not a real element of the building. They'll even toss in a few artificial European names (e.g. the Cresta Bella).

Granted, a large swath of the population will have absolutely no clue what I'm talking about. They'll dismiss such criticism as either jealous resentment or as snobbery. They'll be right on the second one. My guess is that someone who thinks that the status quo of architecture in Colleyville, Southlake, and Mira Vista (just to name local examples) is impressive and otherwise tasteful, would probably not understand what I mean when I criticize that genre of architecture (if you can call it that) as ostentatious and naive.

Here's the basic acid test for which category people fall into:
Did you tune into the "Who Wants to Be a Hilton?" show to:
A) try to glean style pointers from the glamorous Mrs. Hilton?
or
B) to enjoy watching the train wreck of seeing a woman who produced one of our nation’s least tasteful people dispense advice on how to be stylish, graceful, and, generally – tasteful?

If the answer is A, the homes of Cresta Bella might be up your alley.

(this is not directed at Willy, BTW)

What recently built condo/apt buildings in Dallas are not garbage:
- Crescent's Ritz building (from rendering appears very tasteful),
- The two CLB condo buildings (somewhere toward the southern end of McKinney St.), http://www.clbpartne...1063402837.html
- Most of the apartment buildings developed by Columbus Realty Trust (later bought by Post) - just not the big pink one.
- A few of the loft renovations in Deep Ellum
- The W hotel and condos

#65 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 01 July 2005 - 10:31 PM

uh huh

So what is Dallas supposed to build? Perhaps stick with the styles of its early 20th century homes?



BTW, I love the way you are making digs at the people of Dallas and their intelligence and taste. I guess you are inferring that your's is better and that you have a lot to teach us?



I guess my like for this building and its resemblence to many of Dallas' turn of the century mansions. Especially some of those right on the creek below I'm not an architect, but it is very pleasing to the eye as are those homes. It, like the Crescent is very familiar to Dallasites, yet a little foreign. If you are an architect, my only advice is to not overanlayze. Its a wealthy part of town with lots of homes like it. Its not that complicated and doesn't require insulting your neighbor to do.

Posted Image

#66 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 01 July 2005 - 10:43 PM

uh huh

So what is Dallas supposed to build? Perhaps stick with the styles of its early 20th century homes?

View Post



Its a good question. In my opinion, developers should use quality materials, and should mind all of their constituents: buyers/tenants, investors, neighbors, community (who will walk by it and see it every day), the city, and the environment (which is really just affecting more people indirectly via water and air pollution). There is not a single answer to your question. I think it is entirely possible to build an Itallian or French inspired building without simply using it as a means of gunking up the facade. Also, anyone who does use such inspiration should do their homework. Often these projects bear no resemblence to their namesakes, making them really appear naive.

If there is a general rule in resdidential archicture, homes that have extremely complex facades are trying too hard to appear expensive. There really isn't a no-brainer style or genre that I would recommend. I would never condone overly prescriptive architectural regulations on a district or neighborhood wide basis.

This is why we pay good architects for their work and their creativity.

Here's the Cresta Bella for your viewing pleasure. http://www.crestabelladallas.com/

#67 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 01 July 2005 - 10:55 PM

uh huh

BTW, I love the way you are making digs at the people of Dallas and their intelligence and taste.  I guess you are inferring that your's is better and that you have a lot to teach us?



I guess my like for this building and its resemblence to many of Dallas' turn of the century mansions.  Especially some of those right on the creek below  I'm not an architect, but it is very pleasing to the eye as are those homes.  It, like the Crescent is very familiar to Dallasites, yet a little foreign.  If you are an architect, my only advice is to not overanlayze.  Its a wealthy part of town with lots of homes like it.  Its not that complicated and doesn't require insulting your neighbor to do.

View Post


Sorry, I re-read my earlier posts. I didn't intend to suggest that every resident of Dallas is guilty of having the values to which I referred. More to the point, I intended to criticize a few of the buildings there.

I don't think I have anything to "teach" you. Why, do you own a house in Colleyville or something?

The fact that wealthy people bought condos in Dallas (or houses that resemble them) doesn't make those condos or houses tasteful. I wouldn't get in the habit of assuming that there is strong correlation between wealth and taste - especially in Texas.

#68 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 01 July 2005 - 11:09 PM

uh huh


I still don't have a clue what you are trying to say. Let my Dallas, lacking of style mind, try and figure it out:

- Basically you don't like the Cresta Bella and the rest of the mansion resort, though the Mansion hotel itself was built a long time ago, and the others in the complex are merely using its detail. In other words, the whole complex is too gaudy for even its own 5 star status and is trying too hard to be rich, even though the hotel and restaurant both are rated 5 stars and serve 5 star service 2 its 3 (soon to be 4) residential towers. Somehow this relates to wanting to be a Hilton.

- Basically the architects that design buildings along Turtle Creek are clueless about the history of architectural styles in Dallas and particularly along the creek, so instead they build buildings in the same styles as the homes and with the same finishes inside. By using the same styles as the homes below, they are trying to be too wealthy looking for their wealthy tennants as well as looking too wealthy for the people that live along the creek in similarly styled homes.

- Dallas buildings along Turtle Creek are using cheap materials because they are using the same ones as the million dollar homes below which are also cheaply built. Because these are among the most expensive buildings of their size, ever built in Dallas, they must be using cheap material because the stucco doesn't look exactly like the stucco on the homes when it is sitting on the side of a 15 story residential tower.

- The very plain facaded buildings in Dallas have facades that are too complex. They should never follow the style they are using and instead be more plain than they are.

- Turtle Creek does not look great to those who walk by it.

That's my interpretation

Posted Image
Posted Image

#69 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 01 July 2005 - 11:11 PM

I like those condos in Dallas that are part of the Urban Outfitters and Virgin Records Store shopping village off of Central Expwy. They look very smooth, clean, and simple (maybe 4 levels). I am sure they cost an arm and a leg.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#70 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 01 July 2005 - 11:17 PM

The fact that wealthy people bought condos in Dallas (or houses that resemble them) doesn't make those condos or houses tasteful. I wouldn't get in the habit of assuming that there is strong correlation between wealth and taste - especially in Texas.


No, what I am saying is, the Vendome, Mansion and Residence, Plaza de Vogas, Mayfair and even the 60s towers are very representative of homes that were built there in eras bygone. I am not suggesting that they have great taste, but you seem to be insistant that they don't. I'm not judging their taste. I am merely saying that the architecture in the tower is very representative of what kinds of homes existed there before.

If you are an architect, then my problem with your "taste" is that you are too caught up in things being put into their place. That's why we have cookie cutters in the suburbs for miles and miles. That's why the West End is almost afraid to do anything but build brick. I personally, and obviously many who love older neighborhoods appreciate variety. Take a drive up to Greenway Parks, Highland Park, Swiss Avenue, north Oak Cliff or down Gaston to Lakewood. Its not about those people being wealthy, but the beautiful variety in designs. If that makes Dallas too Paris Hilton, then I am proud to be a Paris Hilton. I love to see what will come next, and I like the constrast of the Ritz-Carlton to the Crescent to the W. That's what Dallas has always been about. A mix of styles and eras. That is my only problem with the West Village/Cityplace area. Looks like they will brick everything. Save that for the warehouse districts.

#71 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 554 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 02 July 2005 - 01:10 AM

I agree with Johnny that comparing FW to Dallas is a bit unfair because of the size difference of the two cities. However, FW isn't really competing with Sacramento, Charolotte or even Austin really... But, because of our location 30 miles away from Dallas, we are competing with Big D for development. Why would The Ritz build here if there is already one in Dallas?  Why would Azure be built in FW, when they're already building in Dallas... Why would the NFL give FW a team when they'd have to compete with THE Dallas Cowboys? Arlington already has the Rangers and now the Cowboys - so we missed that boat. Dallas has the Mavs and Stars so I don't see us getting a NHL or NBA team. Get the picture?

View Post



Willy,

Fort Worth and Dallas are different cities and different "markets". If a tourist/biz traveler is visiting Fort Worth, they will likely want to stay here. If they are visting Dallas, they will likely look for a hotel there. A new Ritz in Fort Worth would not cannibalize a Ritz in Dallas. Granted, someone from out of state might not realize this. Often promoters of economic development in Dallas have been able to convince out of state investors (e.g. someone building a new hotel or opening a new regional office) that a Dallas location can serve Fort Worth. It is to Dallas' benefit to convince people of this - to claim us under its umbrella if you will.

There are some notable exceptions to this (businesses that will only have one location in each region of the nation).

Find this annoying, insulting, or simply plane wrong? I do. What to do to remedy this? Do your business with local firms - if not locally (in Fort Worth - not just anywhere in North Texas) then with the Fort Worth branch of a national or regional firm.

An example is architectural services. If you want to help foster a thriving architectural community in Fort Worth, hire an existing Fort Worth architect or - if you've found someone from out of town that is really talented and you want to use them, encourage them to move here. If you say nothing, they won't consider it. If you do, it will at least be on thier mind for consideration to create a presence here - to bring more talented, creative professionals to our city.

View Post


I disagree. Dallas and FW are different cities, but they are NOT different markets. There are some who wish that were more true, but let's be realistic here for a minute. 30-40 years ago, Dallas and FW were two different markets. But not anymore. They have grown together and have even fused their image into a collaborative effort - hence the monikier "DFW Metroplex" - in an effort to promote the entire region. To the people who are doing the building (ie The Ritz, Azure, etc) Dallas/Fort Worth is one market. I never said that a FW Ritz would be canabalized by the Dallas Ritz... What I meant was that the people who decide where The Ritz is going to build will probably never consider building one in FW now that they're building one in Dallas... because in their eyes, DFW is ONE giant market. And why wouldn't they think that - it's one Radio/TV Market... It's served mainly be one giant airport... It's called "The DFW Metroplex"... Sure it's one market, and anyone who still tries to claim otherwise is fooling themselves into simply believing what they want to believe. And we've been moving away from the notion that FW is its own city and not part of the greater DFW Metroplex for a long time now. Until FW recognized the situation, they're never going to overcome the problems that result from it. The "We're not Dallas, Dammit" battle cry is an idea held over from a rivalry that started generations ago. As for Dallas stealing our thunder by telling investors/builders that FW falls under the "Dallas" umbrella... well sure they're going to do that. But, FW has to take part of the blame there for being passive in a lot of instances.

#72 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 554 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 02 July 2005 - 02:03 AM

I'll bite my tongue on this one.

I'd just like to know what Dallas was supposed to build.  What styles, etc would have not been embarrassing to Fort Worth and what isn't pure garbage?

View Post


There are at least two high rise condo projects around Turtle Creek in Dallas that appear to use cheap (maybe dryvit) stucco, and way overkill the details that would indicate "this is an expensive place". The ones built in the 70s and 80s seemed as though the architecture was a total afterthought - they are bland (e.g. the buildings with plane ribbon glass and tan aggregate spandrels) The condos built in the last 7 years are the ones that I was criticizing earlier as silly and tasteless. For them the architecture is nothing more than a gimmick - part of the marketing "concept" - meant to conjure images of foreign lands (apparently that connotes expense and desirability to some) but not a real element of the building. They'll even toss in a few artificial European names (e.g. the Cresta Bella).

Granted, a large swath of the population will have absolutely no clue what I'm talking about. They'll dismiss such criticism as either jealous resentment or as snobbery. They'll be right on the second one. My guess is that someone who thinks that the status quo of architecture in Colleyville, Southlake, and Mira Vista (just to name local examples) is impressive and otherwise tasteful, would probably not understand what I mean when I criticize that genre of architecture (if you can call it that) as ostentatious and naive.

Here's the basic acid test for which category people fall into:
Did you tune into the "Who Wants to Be a Hilton?" show to:
A) try to glean style pointers from the glamorous Mrs. Hilton?
or
;) to enjoy watching the train wreck of seeing a woman who produced one of our nation’s least tasteful people dispense advice on how to be stylish, graceful, and, generally – tasteful?

If the answer is A, the homes of Cresta Bella might be up your alley.

(this is not directed at Willy, BTW)

What recently built condo/apt buildings in Dallas are not garbage:
- Crescent's Ritz building (from rendering appears very tasteful),
- The two CLB condo buildings (somewhere toward the southern end of McKinney St.), http://www.clbpartne...1063402837.html
- Most of the apartment buildings developed by Columbus Realty Trust (later bought by Post) - just not the big pink one.
- A few of the loft renovations in Deep Ellum
- The W hotel and condos

View Post


I never thought anything was directed at me, so I hope you don't think I'm directing anything at you either... I'm just disagreeing with you, which is perfectly fine since no one ever said you and I had to agree on anything right? This is all in a conversational, not argumentative tone...

I think what we're looking at here is a classic case of "subjective opinion". It's not about tastes... It's about personal preference. What's gaudy and cheap to one person is beautiful to another (Ginger or Mary Ann, Monica or Rachel, Dallas or FW). So, because of that, there truly isn't an definitive right or wrong in terms of who's idea is better or who's designs are better. That's the beauty of architecture - it's like art... it has to stand trial in the court of public opinion. Even the mighty World Trade Center in NYC was the target of much public outcry when it was built. Originally New Yorkers hated those buildings. They were seen as eye sores to most. But to the lover of fine modern art, the WTC was a masterpiece. It was simple and lean, it was massive and yet at the same time understated. Those who loved the beauty and grace of the Empire State and Crystler Buildings loathed the monolithic WTC Towers. Take it from another persepective - many Europeans find NYC to be a filthy and hideous city. Parisians usually find NYC disgusting - then again, they find everything - except Paris and Milan - disgusting. Get my point yet?

Besides, I am not annoyed by any specific projects being built in Dallas. I am annoyed by the number of projects and the fact that they have so many new builds going on in a city that has relatively stagnant growth. While over here in Boomtown, we got basically nada except the re-do's that are keeping old buildings from falling into further states of decay. I'm sure we'll get some new high rises eventually. I'm just frustrated by the lack of them right now... why aren't we profiting architectually from our growth? I was frustrated with our growth in the early 90's too - we didn't get ANYTHING then. I just hope we don't miss out this time 'round.

With all that said, I think we have to be careful when pointing the finger at Dallas and yelling "that's cheap". I mean, at least Dallas has a ton of new construction. Let's not throw rocks while we're sitting over here in our bland and boxy 20 year old glass towers. What NEW construction do we have in FW? Okay, Pier 1 Place. It's a nice building. But, I still think it's small taters compared to what's being build in Dallas. The night light on top is cool though. Next. Radio Shack. It's nice. I like the fountains. But, it's not a good design for the location. It would be a perfect fit if it were in Grapevine. It would look great next door to Grapevine Mills or across the street from Fellowship Mega Church. But, there is nothing urban feeling about it and now it's a prominant part of DTFW for God only knows how long. And, it's not like the fun-seekers in Sundance Square are suddenly going to be struck with a need to buy some batteries at midnight and therefore hike 8 blocks over to Store One so the pedestrian-friendly defense is pointless to me. The rest of the major projects in DTFW are re-do's. (We don't even have a subway anymore.) And, how can we accuse Dallas of building cheaply when most of the "vintage" buildings in DTFW that are being converted are merely brick buildings with only some architectual detail? Typically there isn't anything extrodinary about them. They're significant in FW, but on a global or even national scale they're nothing special. The Tower. Uh, it's a nice improvement over the 40 story birdcage look, but I don't think it's going to win tower of the year - and I only WISH they had named it something like Cresta Bella. Heck, they could have named it The Benbrook for all I care. But THE TOWER. Come on. That's barely a step above naming it THE TALL GLASS BUILDING. What I'm getting at is that at least they're building a ton of new stuff in Dallas. Okay, so maybe some of it is risky in terms of design. Maybe some of it is even ugly... But at least they're building them. And, how can one claim that the Ritz and the W are not garbage - they're not even built yet. The Ritz is just a giant hole in the ground right now. Are you really going to call the high rises in Turtle Creek cheap garbage and then turn around and claim that the Post Apartments are NOT cheap? I mean, they are apartments - there's practically no such thing as an apartment that isn't built out of cheap materials. Is there? Don't get me wrong, they're nice - FOR APARTMENTS....

On a serious not... just out of curiosity... As an architect, other than using more expensive materials, what would you have done differently on the Turtle Creek properties? I'm not baiting you into a debate or anything. I'm sincerely interested in hearing what you think could have made these properties more sophisticated and pleasing, not just what you think is wrong with them. I was always taught that if you're going to critique something, then you should go one step farther and offer a suggestion to fix the problem. So, whatcha got?

#73 Shocker

Shocker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Location:Downtown Ft. Worth

Posted 02 July 2005 - 07:31 AM

Rantanamo, I really like the pics of snowy Turtle Creek.

#74 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 02 July 2005 - 11:41 AM

Thanks Shocker. For this "warm blooded" Texan, that was a hard earned and cold photo shoot.

And I apologize to the board if I seemed confrontational. That wasn't my intention. I agree, like Willy said, that there are cheap properties out there. Its just weird that liking certain styles makes one Paris Hilton. Not that she isn't entitled to her own style. I don't want everything to look the same. I'm greatful for the variety, and surprised at such a strong word as garbage.

#75 djold1

djold1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76179

Posted 02 July 2005 - 07:47 PM

The Tall Building Fetish

I guess that I shouldn't be surprised that in a forum like this that there are more than a few that seem to feel that Tall is All when it comes to commercial business construction. I have a different view.

I like tall buildings.

Especially when there is rational for tallness other than bragging rights. Unless the location or perhaps cost or terrain or maybe the need for a company to consolidate bunches of people into a vertical ant pile is overwhelming, there is not much excuse for an extremely tall building. To build tall just to do it is simply just ego or perhaps a form of juvenile corporate phallic symbolism. Testosterone for the the corporate mavens.

I like tall buildings. I like them when they are built with imagination, a sense of history, a vision of the future, and with at least some artistic pretentions. Mostly I like them when they please my eye, which is of course subjective and unique to those of any other potential viewer.

I like tall buildings that carry me up visually and try to make me soar. Buildings that are complete designs from top to bottom that don't end in stubby little boxes on top or that just stop climbing in my mind. Building mediocre tall buildings to fill in holes in the skyline amongst a few excellent designs is common but to be deplored.

I like tall buildings that are varigated. Variation in materials and design and placement are important. I don't much like the visually (my taste) bland all glass monochrome monsters in downtown FW that just reflect the sun into everyone's eyes. Common, tasteless, uninteresting, lifeless. While they are tall they do not soar. While they are tall they do not inspire. They are just... tall. And glassy.

I like tall buildings that aren't really tall. I don't mean the Pier I mini. Look at some pictures of Fort Worth toward the end of the 1920's when the city was approaching 200,000+ thousand people. Many of the XTO buildings are in existence then. From several views the city gives a strong well-filled look of great solidity that broadcasts its strength. There were a good many taller buildings of a common size and there were many different styles interlaced together. They were in no way all good or uniqe or outstanding buildings but togther they all created a object with power.

What do we see now? Many of those old buildings still exist with a random set of newer moderately tall buildings popping up in a few places. The skyline is strange to look at from some angles. And it won't be fixed by force feeding more mediocre tall architecture of dubious distinction and visual appeal into the mix.

If we need tall more buildings then let's justify a reason for them and place them into the cityscape where they meld into and reinforce the vision.

Some in Dallas may want to play a mine is bigger than yours game. Surely Fort Worth has more couth and smarts than to get caught up in trivial pursuits of that kind.

Pete Charlton
The Fort Worth Gazette blog
The Lost Antique Maps of Fort Worth on CDROM
Website: Antique Maps of Texas
Large format reproductions of original antique and vintage Texas & southwestern maps
 


#76 Sam Stone

Sam Stone

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Overton, then Monticello, now expat in OC, CA

Posted 02 July 2005 - 08:44 PM

rantanamo, nice pics. It's amazing how different Texas looks with snow.

djold1, I hear you on the tall builidng fetish thing. I've commented on it in some other threads. There are a handful of tall buildings around the world that are truly iconic. Most, though, are very banal. Height for height's sake is a bit silly. There are many cities in Europe that are entirely lacking in tall buildings but put our cities to shame in terms of vibrancy and fame (Florence anyone?).

I do, on the other hand, have a little Dallas envy. They seem to be buildng at a very fast rate. It would be nice to have some Dallas luxuries (more good restaurants, indie cinema) in FW so I wouldn't ever have to go to Dallas. FW could certainly use some filling in of its underdeveloped areas the way Dallas is doing.

Those buildngs though are so. . . Dallas. Yes, they're opulent. Yes, they certainly look expensive. But they look like imitations of good taste rather than actual good taste. Very much like Dallas itself. If these buildings were women they would be surgically enhanced bottle blondes wearing too much make-up, but very expensive clothes and jewelry. They've been plunked down in the middle of Turtle Creek as incongruesly as a 30-something companion of rich 60-year-old at Sipango. How's that for an analogy. Seriously, one of my favorite buildings is the Crescent but that modern take on Second Empire just does not work unless you're Phillip Johnson.

#77 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 03 July 2005 - 02:29 AM

First of all, a lot of those European cities aren't tall because they were built long ago, and haven't grown much since. Much of Europe is in fact shrinking and seeing suburban and even rural migrantion. Plus many are not severly land limited. When land does get limited and prices high, you end up with Canary Wharf or La Defense which are highrise districts just like anywhere else. Again, those are among the few growing areas of Europe. Even one of the cities I want Dallas to grow up to be, Frankfurt, has grown a decently impressive skyline. Compare that to several in Asia and North American cities where land prices and land scarcity + great economic and population growth have led to the above mentioned recipe that ganers high-rises. Yes, some of the sheer height is about ego, but where exactly do you build in Manhattan or Hong Kong, but up.


You don't have to give Dallas any due, but Dallas officials have worked hard to get things done right in the development arena for once. And I do mean once, look at the crap going on in South Dallas with the FBI. They took chances on some zoning and some infrastructure costs that have simply paid off in the long term. While other cities revitalized great downtowns, Dallas took a lot of heat for how slow things went in their downtown. Instead, they worked on smaller scale urban living in the surrounding areas. JohnR has seen it in his visits and work in Dallas. There has been a ton of shorter infill, that continues to be built at a rapid pace today. Have you seen State-Thomas or the West Village area? The southern areas of Knox Park or the infill between Cedar Springs and McKinney? There is so much that companies are even buying 90% occupied 2 story apartments to tear down and build taller infill. This has led to a scarcity of land. I think, most importantly it has grown interest from within about urban living evidenced, that something like 70% of downtown buyers and renters are coming from Uptown. This has led to higher prices. Heck, because Victory was delayed 4 years, it got squeezed to the point that it would have to build tall. Its not a game of mine is bigger than yours or some lack of couth and smarts by Dallas. The market usually says build up if you want to make any kind of profit or break even on that land. Combine this with Dallas actually growing at a decent clip again, and a scarcity of large chunks of class A space and you have a need for taller. As I've said before, the media just thinks that because they weren't looking across Woodall Rodgers until it creeped to the doorstep of downtown and the cranes got taller and taller. The vibrancy will come as more people, continued mixed-use with retailers, restaurants and other activities come. We have already seen this in Uptown grow more and more each day.

#78 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 03 July 2005 - 01:09 PM

And, they have an absurdly active local press that is constantly trumpeting the size, scale, volume, and expense of each of these projects - in summary: the city just eats up its own press.


That makes me laugh because they are the same media that constantly dogs Dallas in other areas and touts Fort Worth's liveability and growth.

View Post

Yeah, when they choose to recognize that Fort Worth exists.

Anyway, let's stop criticizing Dallas (constructive though it may be) so rantanamo doesn't have to defend it anymore. I personally like things better when I have no idea what's going on in "the city to the east." ;)

#79 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 03 July 2005 - 09:51 PM

I can defend all day and take criticism where it applies. Have no problem with it.

#80 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 04 July 2005 - 05:23 PM

Not quite what I meant but...how fortunate for you. :angry:

Another thing I was thinking about, Fort Worth may be 10 years ahead of Dallas in the DT revitilization field, but Dallas is probably 10 years ahead of Fort Worth in urban development. Dallas is just starting with its downtown while Fort Worth is just starting on massive urban development. The skewed part of this is that Dallas' downtown development is happening WAY faster than Fort Worth's, because the urban development aspect plays a role, while Fort Worth is just beginning to see the fruits of its downtown redevelopment.

So maybe when it all evens out, Dallas will have a nice downtown and nice urban neighborhoods, and Fort Worth will have a nice downtown and nice urban neighborhoods, but Fort Worth's downtown will be just a little nicer than Dallas', and Dallas' urbs will be substantially nicer than Fort Worth's, and that can be what each city is known for and we can all live in peace and harmony (as long as people start referring to DFW as DFW and not "Dallas") :swg:

#81 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 04 July 2005 - 11:28 PM

Somebody has been watching too much Live 8 this weekend. :swg:

"Ebony and Ivory, side by side on my piano......" :angry:
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#82 vjackson

vjackson

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,324 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 05 July 2005 - 07:37 PM

Regarding rantanomo's need to defend Dallas.
I live in Dallas and visit the Dallas forum now and then. I've never felt the need to post on it. If you say anything the forum thinks is negative about Dallas, it doesn't become a discussion, it becomes an attack. And rantanomo's rants are just as long and boring on this forum as they are on the Dallas one. I don't even read them anymore. We get it rantanomo..you love dallas, it's a wonderful city that does no wrong. It the greatest thing since sliced bread. I have a friend from New York living in Dallas temporarily because of his job. We both laugh at the way the Dallas forum attacks anyone who isn't in love with everything Dallas. He summed it up best when he said the great american cities, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. don't need defending. They stand on thier own, if you don't like them, so what, the world considers them great cities. They don't proclaim themselves to be world class (see Dallas)....the world does. Let rantanomo defend Dallas. I live here and I can tell you....it's a city that needs defending.

#83 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 05 July 2005 - 09:57 PM

Sorry Vic. But that was the weakest post I have seen here yet. :unsure:

Keep it real Rant. Keep it real. Nothin wrong with defending your peeps. :D

Vic, at least Rant steps up to the plate. Look at all the pics and stories he posts. Great material.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#84 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 05 July 2005 - 10:27 PM

I just want him to stop defending Dallas so I don't have to read positive things about his city on the Fort Worth forum :unsure: Anyway, we should stop talking about Dallas/Fort Worth comparisons before things get out of hand.

While I'm here, I'll share another thought I had about the downtown residential market...if you think about it, it's a lot like fruit. Right now it's ripe for the picking, and sure maybe there's some concern about picking it all right away and getting some sour fruit in the bunch, but sooner or later every smart farmer has to harvest before winter. Hopefully this city has some farmers who realize that they have to pick the ripe fruit before it dies, or otherwise we'll have to wait until the next season to do things right, and in the meantime we'll have to look at a field of rotting fruit and many people will be dissapointed that they don't have fresh fruit to eat.

Yeah, I'm bored.

#85 rantanamo

rantanamo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 06 July 2005 - 12:21 AM

Regarding rantanomo's need to defend Dallas.
I live in Dallas and visit the Dallas forum now and then. I've never felt the need to post on it. If you say anything the forum thinks is negative about Dallas, it doesn't become a discussion, it becomes an attack. And rantanomo's rants are just as long and boring on this forum as they are on the Dallas one. I don't even read them anymore. We get it rantanomo..you love dallas, it's a wonderful city that does no wrong. It the greatest thing since sliced bread. I have a friend from New York living in Dallas temporarily because of his job. We both laugh at the way the Dallas forum attacks anyone who isn't in love with everything Dallas. He summed it up best when he said the great american cities, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. don't need defending. They stand on thier own, if you don't like them, so what, the world considers them great cities. They don't proclaim themselves to be world class (see Dallas)....the world does. Let rantanomo defend Dallas. I live here and I can tell you....it's a city that needs defending.


That's fine, though I totally disagree with the whole premise of that post.

First of all, if you actually read dallasmetropolis, rather than just skim for cheerleading, you'll see that there is tons of serious posting and criticism about Dallas. The longest and most inciteful posts are just that, and include debate from us regular guys as well as some city officials, developers, etc.

- Second of all, you really don't read my posts if you have the impression that I think that Dallas is perfect. Perhaps you missed the fact that I actually moved from Dallas by choice to another region of the country because of some things that were going on in Dallas at the time? I am a huge critic of Dallas and its public officials as well as bad development. I have also been out in the field actually doing for the city and its people.

- Third, if your friend really feels that way, then your friend doesn't read the board either. Why don't you guys participate if you feel so strongly that we are cheerleaders? And if you think that we think Dallas is world-class, then you certainly DON'T read the board. That's what the board is all about. Working towards a world-class Dallas.

- Those cities not needing defending is the funniest thing that I have ever read. Perhaps you are not a regular reader of other forums. Perhaps in your mind those places are perfect, but in the minds of many in and around these places, they are not. They defend their cities(especially Chicago) probably harder than any and seem to feel the need to squash any photo thread or news of development in any other city that dare squelch their domain. For example, on a San Antonio development thread, several Chicago forumers felt the need to point out that San Antonio only grows because it annexed a lot of land and has many illegal immigrants. Then they went on to list every project in Chicago and said that San Antonio was not a real city. Totally unprovoked.

All that I can say to anyone is to not read my posts if you don't like them. I don't get angry, usually. I defend, refute, etc, with facts and figures. I never claim Dallas as a world class city. I even started a post asking what does Dallas need to do to move towards the next tier of cities as well as my current rant about Dallas schools not cleaning up, the almost criminal gentrification of Lake Highlands, Suburban developers building suburban on McKinney Ave of all places, strong mayor proposal, the slow playing of the next DART line, developers holding land, etc, etc. YOU'd just better know that if someone says, "Dallas is building tall for a pissing contest" when Dallas City Council people, developers and citizens worked the urban fabric to create a fertile high-rise environment; I'm going to answer with that very answer. If I disagree with someone's assessment that the style of some buildings are out of place for Dallas or more gaudy than what's around it, when the buildings are surrounded by much of the same, I'm gonna say it. Is that a crime or boosterism? Is it boosterism because some of us actually think that Dallas in 2016 is very conducive of an Olympic bid based on expected infrastructure, then I'm gonna say it.

I'm just sad that you and your friend seem to skip 3/4 of the posts over there because there are some positive posts or perhaps because there are actual architects, developers, politicians, etc that seem to believe there is a lot of positive monentum and some unique possibilties that are shaping up. If you really feel that we are too positive and need to be put in our places, then why don't you post a post entitled, "Dallas aint world-class" You'll find that most agree with you.

Sorry I bore you,
rantanamo

#86 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,363 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 06 July 2005 - 06:12 AM

Rantanamo, I enjoy reading all of your posts, whether it is here, on the Dallas forum, or on SSP. The posts are not boring.

#87 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 06 July 2005 - 10:54 PM

RANTANAMO , NO!!!!
SAFLY-(Pleading w/ you as you are about to "LIGHT UP" the Landmark Tower for all of humanity)
Please, put down the FLAMETHROWER! :eek:


I am still shaking in my boxers over your last post. (Not in any ehh perverted kinda ahh way.)

But Man, you really put the dagger in that one poser (eh hemm!) I mean poster.
Calling her out to start such a topic would "Mos Def" cause WW3. Tejas style.

As for the Chi-town BUSTERS claimin this and that about SA. Whatever, most of todays migrant workers head up north and make home in IL and NC anyway. No probs for me in SA. They've just been HAte HAte HAte HAte Hatin on my boyz eva since MJ left them high and drizzEYE. :(

BAM!
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users