pixelchick Anonymous

please oh please write your letters!

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

holman Anonymous

Big shoot out between rival gangs at 2:30 in the morning a few days ago in front of Seven drew 25 cop cars and cost massive overtime. This is the perception our fair city now has regarding Deep Ellum. Thanks.

Under 21 kiddos who mill around (tresspass) on private property until 0400 apparently engage in enough petty crimes and assaults to rack up police reports, further driving down property values. Somebody has to pay the tab for all this. Right now, it's the property owners and Dallas taxpayers. Next, yer up at bat. So stop whining.

Deep Ellum used to be the place to be. It is the present crowd that you are attracting with your venues which need to go. You aren't Deep Ellum, and never were. You are interlopers. Those who support the introduction of human activity into the neighborhood that results in highly destructive activity are part of the problem, not the cure.

These SUPs are a reaction to your actions. Deal with it.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

holman Anonymous

The property owners who rent to the tenants that operate the venues which attract the crowd that causes the mayhem . . . is not the bunch I am talking about. But I will now.

Let me foretell the future: Deep Ellum is going to be bull-dozed (see: The Door property transition into mid-rise residential/gallery/retail by Westdale Asset Management).

Why? The City government, the neighborhood property owners (other than the entertainment slum lords), and Dallasites all across the fruited plain . . . do not see an exit strategy. It ain’t getting’ better, baby. The strategy by the lessor is to lease at cheap rates the low-end venues so to keep it dilapidated and dangerous so there is no chance of making a half-assed comeback to Edie Brickell years. There is a net benefit to this.

Land will rise to $40 per square foot, and entire city blocks will sell to developers who will get a good reception downtown to flush the existing improvements down Mill Creek along with the rest of the brackish water.

The so-called major property owners who presently play the deal like they really care about giving the “Black n Blue” night people a venue, are pushing land value up over any return the current buildings can generate. That means the buildings must go. And the City Council will agree to it in the name of Safety.

If we don’t hit a recession, Deep Ellum will be a branded entertainment district anchored by mid-density residential and art galleries. It will be unrecognizable. Kinda like the West End.

That’s where we are going because that is where the underlying property owners who intentionally brought in a bunch of riff-raff with no more personality than a paper cup.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

pixelchick Anonymous

I frequent the majority of these bars. I've never experienced any "riff-raff" from any of the patrons. Anything that begins to happen riff-raff-like gets nipped in the bud by the employees/owners immediately. This area is loved by all the people that frequent these places. This is all we have left. It's our own little neighborhood of culture, restaurants, bars, clubs and art galleries. Sadly there is no other place like this in Dallas. Please understand that this little section of Dallas is actually a very large part of many people's lifes.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

holman Anonymous

And I understand what you are saying, and where you are coming from. But there is a reason why the lessors of these properties do not upgrade the buildings and spend the monies necessary to bring in talent that would attract a larger spectrum of the "entertainment dollar".

It would make Deep Ellum viable as an edgey entertainment district, as it is presently configured. This would block redevelopment. The current property owners make no superstructure upgrades nor do they actively solicit tenants (club/retaurant operators) who would pay for such upgrades at their own expense to create the environment that large numbers of Dallasites would want to patronize.

Basically, the current uses of the properties on the west side of Deep Ellum are what is known in real estate parlance as "interim uses" designed to cover property taxes until it is time to redevelop.

When the City deems the area to be "blighted", that is the harbinger of a legal process where by they will assuyme the authority to "clean it up". And I believe that the present landlords want to stay just in front of that state.

But it's coming because these SUPs are a band-aid. The perception of Deep Ellum by the rest of Dallas is what will cause the district to be re-sleeved into a fake and glitzed copy of itself.

Kinda like a Stepford Wife.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

holman Anonymous

For instance, if a Houston Blues Club operator came to town loaded with cash and backed by a bank and wanted to lease 20,000 sq.ft. in the middle of Deep Ellum, they would demand a 20 year lease and spend a million on finish-out.

A property owner cannot be part of a larger redevelopment plan if he is encumbered by a credit tenant on a long term lease, for he has conveyed a portion of the bundle of rights of ownership - use and occupancy - to others for 20 years.

This is probably the single greatest red flag why Deep Ellum is where it is today. The current property owners block reinvestment as an art and entertainment enclave that would make it viable, as it is. They are letting Deep Ellum bleed out.

They are swinging for the fences. Complete redevelopment.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

holman Anonymous

Uptown's built out and over-priced (the land - $75/SF).

The three main drags coming out of downtown - Elm, Main and Commerce make Deep Ellum a natural. Central Expy blocks East Dallas on optimal access, which means much.

The Cedars is still too dangerous. Farmers Market now has a 27 million mega shelter, which will kill all but spec development.

It's already started on the east side of Deep Ellum where Mort Meyerson has the Old Dr Pepper building, Paul Morgan redeveloped the Bill Reed Building, and Westdale's new construction near Baylor and the proposed substation and now in the 3100 block of Main Street.

With the subprime collapse, apartments are back in demand.

It's rumored that there is a block-up in progress, but I have no direct knowledge of it.

The thing of it is, the biggest block to re-igniting Deep Ellum as it was, has always been a select number of entertainment-oriented property owners who took the decision to not long-term lease to viable operators who had the finincial strength to get it done, over the long pull. They just didn't want to lock their properties' up like that, for a reason. No doubt their lament is that the tenant never showed up, but look around: Uptown, downtown, Southside, Denton, and Arlington all got it done.

They are old, absentee and want to cash out.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

pixelchick Anonymous

From D.E.E.P.'s blog:

"Blogging Live from City Hall: Monkey Bar City Plan Commission Results

It is difficult to count the number of people here at this time, but probably close to 75 in support of the venues. When asked who was here to support the Monkey Bar, practically the whole room (which was almost filled) stood up. The majority of them were residents of the neighborhood. Still, four residents that were immediate neighbors (within 500 feet) showed up in opposition. They had never spoken with the owner until last week.

Despite Gerald's (Monkey Bar's owner) written commitment to try and meet the oppositions specific demands, the Commission denied the Monkey Bar. Gerald says he intends to appeal.

Currently Minc is facing the commission with some strong opposition. Everyone is here supporting them. I will give an update when it is finished...."

I don't understand. That bar was there a LOOOONG time before those lofts were. The neighbors have to know what they are getting themselves into when they move into that area AND RIGHT BEHIND A BAR. Seriously..

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

pixelchick Anonymous

From D.E.E.P's blog:

"Blogging Live from City Hall: Minc City Plan Commission Results

There was opposition to Minc mostly from landowners. Gibson Properties was the principal opposition. There was also very strong support from residents and immedate neighbors. The Commission actually seemed to be in favor for Minc. However, there was a motion made by a Commission member for an extension until next week, so that they could attempt reconcilliation with the property owners. Several of the Commission members felt it was not necessary; that they would vote for Minc's approval. However, the motion was seconded and passed. Minc will face the Commission again next week."

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

pixelchick Anonymous

From D.E.E.P.'s blog:

"Blogging Live from City Hall: Amsterdam Plan Commission Results

Amsterdam strong support, even from property owners. No opposition.

Commission approved their SUP for three years. That recommendation will now go before Dallas City Council on Dec. 12, where the final descision will be made."

"Blogging Live from City Hall: Fallout Lounge Plan Commission Results

Many supporters. No opposition.

Commission approved their SUP for three years. That recommendation will now go before Dallas City Council on Dec. 12, where the final descision will be made."

"Blogging Live from City Hall: Dada Plan Commission Results

No opposition. Strong support.

Commission approved their SUP for three years. That recommendation will now go before Dallas City Council on Dec. 12, where the final descision will be made."

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

pixelchick Anonymous

I just saw a post from Doublewide and they are approved for 2 years..

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Bemused Anonymous

"Recently, however, the commission denied the Monkey Bar's SUP request, ostensibly, because of one resident who complained of late night noise."

According to law, one person is all it takes. When will you people accept that these matters are not determined by popularity contests? The majority of bars in this city are operating illegally, and if Dallas were to enforce its own ordinances, few of them would remain in existence. Ah, what a tranquil proposition.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

SteveM Anonymous

One thing I didn't like from the DMN article:

"The commission more hesitantly recommended a new permit for the Double Wide bar, with one commissioner saying the owners were lucky no one came to City Hall to speak out against them."

Does anyone know why they were hesitant to recommend a new permit if no one was there in opposition? Sounds like the one commissioner was looking for an excuse to deny them.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

chasd00 Anonymous

in response to SteveM

they were hesitant to recommend Double Wide's SUP because there were 5 land owners who officially filed objections but they didn't show. Had they shown Double Wide would most likely have not been approved.

On another note, I don't know how the Gibson Properties can object to Minc but not New Amsterdam. Everyone who hangs out on Expo knows that on the street the noise in front of Minc is the same as the noise in front of New Amsterdam, zero.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Bemused Anonymous

Many establishments operating as bars in this city are designated to function first and foremost as restaurants. Clearly, something is amiss, as I've never witnessed scores of drunks filing out of a Cafe Express at two in the morning. If Dallas were to investigate these contraventions with the appropriate scrutiny, we'd find that only a handful of bars are doing business as they should be. Those should remain in existence. The rest should be brought into compliance or terminated.

We prattle endlessly about the evils of driving while intoxicated in this state, but we also empower some of the least responsible individuals among us with the right to sell alcohol. Indifferent toward TABC regulations, their primary goal is to generate revenue. Then we support their trespasses.

Madness, stupidity, and ineffable miscomprehension!

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

chasd00 Anonymous

"Indifferent toward TABC regulations, their primary goal is to generate revenue. " - bemused

That is laughable. Every bartender, barback, waitress/waiter I've ever met fears the TABC. They can march into a bar at any time like the Gestapo and stop all sales while they perform a surprise inspection (I've witnessed this at July Alley in Deep Ellum)

I challenge anyone to walk into any bar from Uptown to Deep Ellum to Southside and ask them if they blow off the TABC.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Bemused Anonymous

Most bartenders, and bar owners, fear the TABC only in the name of self-preservation. Are you purporting that most bars cut patrons off when their their blood-alcohol level has likely reached the legal limit (probably after two drinks within the same hour)? If you subscribe to that misconception, I implore you to undeceive yourself.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

holman Anonymous

Here’s an angle worth mentioning:

“WHEREAS, while it is recognized that, in time, residential uses in the area may increase, those who choose to live in this district should expect should expect that noise, odor, and the visual intrusions associated with those business uses will be greater than those normally associated with other residential areas. It is the expressed intent of this ordinance to preserve and protect the business uses which currently exist or have traditionally existed in this area and to this end, the provisions of this ordinance should be broadly interpreted;

WHEREAS, the city council finds that it is in the public interest to establish this planned development district, to be known as the Deep Ellum/Near East Side District.”

It appears that near by property owners must assert a compelling encroachment argument OVER AND ABOVE normal noise, etc., generated by the typical bar/restaurant.

Maybe our elected representatives, and those on the board, should be reminded of the preamble of the adopted ordinance – PD 269.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

pixelchick Anonymous

I don't know if this is true, but i heard that Gibson Properties had a problem with Minc partly due to the trash they create from all the flyers they pass out. Surely that can't be the only reason, but that's one thing...

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Clay213 Anonymous

Hey bemused: You've got your five minutes of fame with your cause in your neighborhood.

Well, this is my neighborhood, and I respectfully ask you to stay the hell out of it.

2 years ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )