Ross Perot hints at building a supertall downtown... (Dallas, Austin: apartments, condos)

[TheDarkSide]

Originally Posted by SVTRay

I keep hearing ho the FAA has a building height limit, if thats true, how is Perot able to state "No height limitations?"

Yeah, about the Height Limitations, I'm gonna look into that.

I can't help but think that those "limitations" were either made when the city was young
(long before any of the GLASS buildings)
and many airplanes were bi-planes or something.

Or... It was an assumption or fabricated statement made by a Dallasite during a Dallas vs Houston
debate, as a reason for why Dallas is not as tall ; (I recall someone saying that the bank of America was stopped short, and its twin were not built, due to the restrictions)
Not sure it it's true, but there IS some proof.


One thing is for sure... If there IS a limitation, it is out-dated.
And I don't see how ANY planes coming out of Love Field would crash into Downtown,
especially since the runway doesn't point in Downtown's direction. ?

[TheDarkSide]

Originally Posted by Aceraceae

The height limitations are a site by site basis. I didn't think this site had one.

I didn't understand your comment at 1st, but I get it now; and it makes sense.

Having to do with zoning; One could assume that some thought goes into the aesthetics of
Downtown; making sure that certain buildings/landmarks are not blocked-off,
so that the skyline remains beautiful and impressive.

And if that's TRUE... then that would be a TERRIBLE spot for a Supertall.
Being that it would block Fountain Place. (!)

[Aceraceae]

Originally Posted by TheDarkSide

I didn't understand your comment at 1st, but I get it now; and it makes sense.

Having to do with zoning; One could assume that some thought goes into the aesthetics of
Downtown; making sure that certain buildings/landmarks are not blocked-off,
so that the skyline remains beautiful and impressive.

And if that's TRUE... then that would be a TERRIBLE spot for a Supertall.
Being that it would block Fountain Place. (!)

I'm not sure about the city zoning locations. My understanding is the FAA has height limitations on certains parts and/or specific locations downtown. No expert though.

[HockDad]

I am most interested in the potential anchor tenant. Would it be a local company moving or a Fortune 500 company relocating?

[Made_it_To_the_Metroplex]

Originally Posted by HockDad

I am most interested in the potential anchor tenant. Would it be a local company moving or a Fortune 500 company relocating?

Guess it wouldn't be these folks...

California logistics tech firm Omnitracs eyeing Dallas - Dallas Business Journal

But 1) it's great to see interest from such a large new potential downtown tenant and 2) I'd love to know if there is interest from enough potential tenants to warrant building Perot's proposed tower!

[BCB]

Has Perot said anything lately about his plans?

[Dallaz]

Originally Posted by BCB

Has Perot said anything lately about his plans?

Not that I know of.

[rantanamo]

Originally Posted by TheDarkSide

Yeah, about the Height Limitations, I'm gonna look into that.

I can't help but think that those "limitations" were either made when the city was young
(long before any of the GLASS buildings)
and many airplanes were bi-planes or something.

Or... It was an assumption or fabricated statement made by a Dallasite during a Dallas vs Houston
debate, as a reason for why Dallas is not as tall ; (I recall someone saying that the bank of America was stopped short, and its twin were not built, due to the restrictions)
Not sure it it's true, but there IS some proof.


One thing is for sure... If there IS a limitation, it is out-dated.
And I don't see how ANY planes coming out of Love Field would crash into Downtown,
especially since the runway doesn't point in Downtown's direction. ?

The FAA height limits are per site, but follow a pattern. Its pretty easy to make out based on where the tallest buildings are downtown and Uptown. Harry Hines certainly seems to be less height restricted than areas to the east. Harwood's Plans for buildings like the Lexi and Blue Ciel are much taller than anything else uptown. The former Mandarin Oriental plans for Victory Park were also much taller than what exists, while immediately to the east you have the Ritz-Carlton which went with two shorter towers instead of a taller building even with the price of land being incredibly high on that site. All of the older supertall proposals for DT Dallas have been on this side of downtown. Also, Museum Tower and the second and third towers on the Craig Hall site are shorter than Chase and Trammell Crowe and there's no massing agreement in place. The Perot site has long been known to be height unrestricted. Its hard to find official documentation, but a quick search of city planning documents mentions the restrictions many times following federal guidelines for building height. I've seen the diagram before. Definitely is a slope formula based on the runways. Not just a blanket over an entire area.

[R1070]

I do think there are a 2-3 sites left without a FAA height restriction. Most are around the West End Historic District and the development style in that area is low to mid rise bright buildings.

[rantanamo]

West Dallas is an interesting part of town in this regard. I know many think nothing is going to happen there(bridge to nowhere), but there are already developments going up there and Trinity Groves has become one of the great spots in Dallas. The zoning there is very dense and it doesn't have any height restrictions, so you may see some of the tallest buildings in the city built there if things really start to go well. The former trailer park development and Sylvan 30 will be good indicators of how much demand there might be there.