That Calatrava Bridge (Dallas, Trinity, Benjamin: 2013, school, tax)

[rantanamo]

Originally Posted by Johnhw2

Dallas needs to grow south of DT generally so if this opens up the undeveloped near DT areas it is needed long term. Traffic north and west of DT Dallas seems driven by all the growth that way. Houston grows to all 4 compass points (less to the East but not declining for sure) while Dallas seems to grew much slower south or am I missing something as a new DFW resident?

This is correct. For a while DFW really only grew due north of Dallas and has pushed to the NW. Basically growing towards large business developments, which new freeways tend to follow, lead to or go up in conjuction with. You had the push up Central Expressway, then the North Tollway, I-35 and 114, with 635, PGBT and 121 connecting them. Now you are seeing a little bit of a push on I-30 in both directions. West/SW Dallas in particular is seeing more and more job growth, right as 161 connects to I-20 and I-30, and loop 12 is seeing upgrades on the west side. In other words, that's a long way to say, we know the drivers of growth in these directions, and need to continue in those directions or you end up with a stagnant city. This is not to say, lets run everyone out of south Dallas. Its to say, there are a lot of freeways needing upgrading and a lot of land to be used to create jobs. That's why you hear so much about downtown trying to revitalize. I know if you're up north of 635 you could care less, but Dallas proper needs the new tax base, jobs and development to remain vital. Lure jobs downtown instead of always far up north and you have a chance of people living south of I-30. Create jobs south of I-30 and you have a chance of people living south of I-30. Grow the inland port instead of everything going to Perot's inland port and you have a chance of people living in Ellis and Kaufman County. I know people are against the bridge and could care less what it represents, but for Dallas to survive its going to have to push and force its way into a more balanced future if it doesn't want to become the new rust belt. Sometimes that doesn't include always catering only to the needs of us north of I-30.

[Lakewooder]

Developers purchase key building site on Riverfront Boulevard in Dallas | Dallas-Fort Worth Commercial Real Estate News - Business News for Dallas, Texas - The Dallas Morning News

"...a real estate group that includes Mockingbird Station builder Ken Hughes has purchased about 25 acres on Riverfront Boulevard at the foot of the new Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge"

[Made_it_To_the_Metroplex]

Originally Posted by rantanamo

This is correct. For a while DFW really only grew due north of Dallas and has pushed to the NW. Basically growing towards large business developments, which new freeways tend to follow, lead to or go up in conjuction with. You had the push up Central Expressway, then the North Tollway, I-35 and 114, with 635, PGBT and 121 connecting them. Now you are seeing a little bit of a push on I-30 in both directions. West/SW Dallas in particular is seeing more and more job growth, right as 161 connects to I-20 and I-30, and loop 12 is seeing upgrades on the west side. In other words, that's a long way to say, we know the drivers of growth in these directions, and need to continue in those directions or you end up with a stagnant city. This is not to say, lets run everyone out of south Dallas. Its to say, there are a lot of freeways needing upgrading and a lot of land to be used to create jobs. That's why you hear so much about downtown trying to revitalize. I know if you're up north of 635 you could care less, but Dallas proper needs the new tax base, jobs and development to remain vital. Lure jobs downtown instead of always far up north and you have a chance of people living south of I-30. Create jobs south of I-30 and you have a chance of people living south of I-30. Grow the inland port instead of everything going to Perot's inland port and you have a chance of people living in Ellis and Kaufman County. I know people are against the bridge and could care less what it represents, but for Dallas to survive its going to have to push and force its way into a more balanced future if it doesn't want to become the new rust belt. Sometimes that doesn't include always catering only to the needs of us north of I-30.

Very well put! The ONLY reason we didn't end up renting south of the river is lack of "necessities" compared to other areas. Sure, there are great homes and the Bishop Arts district, but not much in the way of newer grocery stores, Target, etc... At least from what we saw/read.

[TheOverdog]

The Heart Walk crossed the Caltrava Bridge this year instead of passing through downtown, starting & ending at the AAC. I know that the bridge represents the first step towards the future for that area, but right now that area looks like a warzone if you are passing it on foot. So I wish South Dallas all the best. It's gonna need it.

[ggolf]

Ugly waste of tax money. The fact that the designer, an overpaid architect had to tone down the design to the point of it being a PVC arch in the center versus a real gem like the Golden Gate or Brooklyn bridges makes Dallas a laughing stock. IT'S A JOKE!

[Lakewooder]

First off, the bridge does not go to South Dallas - you are miles off...ever heard of "West Dallas"?

Secondly most of the bridge was tax money but the 'extras' were partially paid with with donations, hence the name "Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge".

True cost of Dallas

With this purchase and several large commercial projects already underway, the bridge is bringing a financial return - and this is only the beginning. If you don't ever go to "South Dallas", then you may not use the bridge. However, I've used it several times and it's a great shortcut. The last time I used it was to go to Trinity Commons, the really cool restaurant complex/incubator/event space. MHH is going to be needed even more once work commences on the I-30 bridge replacement. I doubt many people will be complaining then!

[RonnieinDallas]

Originally Posted by ggolf

Ugly waste of tax money. The fact that the designer, an overpaid architect had to tone down the design to the point of it being a PVC arch in the center versus a real gem like the Golden Gate or Brooklyn bridges makes Dallas a laughing stock. IT'S A JOKE!

Whatever

Neither one of those bridges were popular when they were built either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HZv3...e_gdata_player

VS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knlpO...e_gdata_player

Head to head Dallas doesn't look to shabby IMO

[TXNGL]

Originally Posted by ggolf

Ugly waste of tax money. The fact that the designer, an overpaid architect had to tone down the design to the point of it being a PVC arch in the center versus a real gem like the Golden Gate or Brooklyn bridges makes Dallas a laughing stock. IT'S A JOKE!

I thought so for a long time. Especially before it was finished and looked like a McDonald's sign. LOL. Now, I have to say, I really like it. I would never put it up there with the Golden Gate or Brooklyn Bridge, but I do think it gives a bit of character to the area.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by ggolf

Ugly waste of tax money. The fact that the designer, an overpaid architect had to tone down the design to the point of it being a PVC arch in the center versus a real gem like the Golden Gate or Brooklyn bridges makes Dallas a laughing stock. IT'S A JOKE!

And lost on so many is the fact that Dallas has other white arches that one can sees driving up I-35 and I-30.
Tie-ins like that are big to architects.

Count me in on the side that likes the bridge very much. Dallas is not an old city. The Trinity basin soil poses all kinds of engineering issues that render a rock and cement bridge, a la Brooklyn, a dream and a old school suspension bridge, Golden Gate, way too expensive - not to mention a massive waste of materials.

BTW - the bridge is not PVC in case anyone is wondering.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by rantanamo

This is correct. For a while DFW really only grew due north of Dallas and has pushed to the NW. Basically growing towards large business developments, which new freeways tend to follow, lead to or go up in conjuction with. You had the push up Central Expressway, then the North Tollway, I-35 and 114, with 635, PGBT and 121 connecting them. Now you are seeing a little bit of a push on I-30 in both directions. West/SW Dallas in particular is seeing more and more job growth, right as 161 connects to I-20 and I-30, and loop 12 is seeing upgrades on the west side. In other words, that's a long way to say, we know the drivers of growth in these directions, and need to continue in those directions or you end up with a stagnant city. This is not to say, lets run everyone out of south Dallas. Its to say, there are a lot of freeways needing upgrading and a lot of land to be used to create jobs. That's why you hear so much about downtown trying to revitalize. I know if you're up north of 635 you could care less, but Dallas proper needs the new tax base, jobs and development to remain vital. Lure jobs downtown instead of always far up north and you have a chance of people living south of I-30. Create jobs south of I-30 and you have a chance of people living south of I-30. Grow the inland port instead of everything going to Perot's inland port and you have a chance of people living in Ellis and Kaufman County. I know people are against the bridge and could care less what it represents, but for Dallas to survive its going to have to push and force its way into a more balanced future if it doesn't want to become the new rust belt. Sometimes that doesn't include always catering only to the needs of us north of I-30.

New Rust Belt? The way to avoid that outcome is to remain a low tax center for business and citizens.

That said I am all for eliminating any excuses for the failures of Dallas south of I-30. The only way these things get done is with public and private investment, access improvements, effective policing, and improved schooling. It's a heck of task that will take decades but it's worth trying. A good start would be for folks in the area to stop electing criminals and small time extortionists to public office. Likely the best we can reasonably hope for is pockets of revitalization around public infrastructure investments - the golf course, targeted improvements around Fair Park etc.