City Council Members Debate Housing Options For Former Hospital at 2929 South Hampton Road
Share News:
The Dallas City Council has three options for a former hospital site at 2929 South Hampton Road: provide affordable and permanent supportive housing for the homeless, subdivide the property and use it for another public purpose, or sell the land and include a deed restriction that funds from the sale could be used for another similar project.
Christine Crossley, director of the Office of Homeless Solutions, said Dallas bought the former University General Hospital in 2022 for $6.5 million to be repurposed as permanent supportive housing for the homeless.
A preliminary plan calls for about 100 housing units, a commercial kitchen, and office space on the 12-acre property. The site is adjacent to single-family homes, a senior living apartment complex, an elementary school, and Kiest Park, The Real Deal reported in January 2022.
No action was taken at a March 25 meeting of the Council’s Housing and Homelessness Solutions Committee, but the panel members had plenty to say about the future of 2929 South Hampton Road.
Housing Options For 2929 South Hampton Road
Planning and Urban Design Assistant Director Andreea Udrea reviewed the existing zoning. The site is in an 18-acre planned development divided into seven tracts. The old hospital building has been vacant since 2014.
Crossley outlined numerous options if the council wants to create housing at the Hampton Road site. It would not serve as a “walk-up” shelter. However, there are options for hospice care and housing for the elderly and disabled as well as youth and families who were formerly homeless. A workforce housing option could include affordable multifamily units or a community land trust.
Communal gardens, nature trails, a culinary arts program, and other amenities could be provided through Option 2. Fort Worth’s Renaissance Heights mixed-use development could be modeled on a smaller scale, Crossley said.
Zarin Gracey, who represents the Hampton Road area, said he prefers Option 2: subdividing the property and creating a mixed-use area to include affordable and permanent supportive housing. Staff is also recommending Option 2.
Gracey also inquired about the viability of selling the land and routing those funds toward another permanent supportive housing project on Independence Road. Gracey emphasized that he didn’t want both sites — Independence and Hampton — to remain vacant for many years. He also wanted to begin community engagement immediately.
“It is absolutely critical that we don’t move forward saying that it is Option 2 and we go back to the community talking only about Option 2, because that’s what will get us in trouble like we did the first time,” Gracey said. “I want us to openly talk about all three of these options and then from there, develop a timeline around one of those options … I’m excited about bringing this back to the community.”
Mayor Pro Tem Carolyn King Arnold said previous community meetings on the Hampton Road site have become hostile due to misinformation. County and Dallas ISD officials do not support “a homeless configuration,” she said. She added that she was offended that conversations were taking place about District 4, which she represents, without her input. Kiest Park and the surrounding area are in District 4.
“[Elected officials] are not going to keep giving us money and support when they know we’re being disrespected as a community and council members,” she said.
Council Feedback on Hampton Road Site
Councilwoman Cara Mendelsohn said she supports Option 1 if it could be defined specifically as a senior living complex.
“Option 2 is a big mess. It’s literally the kitchen sink,” she said. “I can’t even believe the diversity of items that are listed. It’s lacking in focus.”
It wouldn’t break ground until after 2027 and the need for housing exists today, she said. Also, it’s a massive project that would net just 100 units, Mendelsohn added.
“Either move forward with a fabulous senior complex that can truly meet a need that we know exists for our lowest-income seniors who are not a threat to the community … but if they can’t live with it, just sell it and get the Independence Road [facility] open,” she said.
Councilman Adam Bazaldua agreed that Option 1 is the most viable. Councilwoman Gay Donnell Willis suggested exploring a hybrid between Options 1 and 2.
Councilman Chad West said the council owes it to the community to give staff clear guidance on what they want the Hampton Road site to become.
“I understand the concerns with Option 2, and I also understand why you’re proposing it based on the feedback you’ve gotten from us and the community,’ he said. “It would be a mistake not to incorporate all types of housing here, including for-sale housing. I know that’s something that’s a priority for neighbors and we need more of that. I saw retail as a possible suggestion. I would just say whatever the market would support. I don’t think we should be saying we want to put in this or that. That should be driven by whoever is the master planner.”
An Update on Hotel Miramar
HHS Committee members also were given an update last week on the redevelopment of the former Hotel Miramar at 1950 Fort Worth Avenue, but the matter was not discussed in depth. The city hired Kirksey Architecture to design the project and is seeking a qualified developer to remodel the site and create permanent supportive housing units. A developer could be selected at the June 12 City Council meeting, said Darwin Wade, assistant director of Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization.
About 3,401 permanent supportive housing units are needed in Dallas and Collin counties, Housing Forward president and CEO Sarah Kahn said during last week’s meeting.
2 Comments
Leave a Comment
Based solely on the Five E’s, this project should be CANCELLED.
The former councilman tried to sneak this project past District 3 residents without telling anyone and the City staff helped him do it. This is the wrong location for a Homeless facility of any kind. There was no Feasibility Study done beforehand to determine if this building would be suitable for permanent supportive housing and there is NO BUDGET for renovations.
The location is in the middle of a Latino neighborhood, next to an elementary school, a branch library, TWO senior residences, a nature preserve, and Kiest Park and sits on 12 prime acres of land that are best suited for single family homes.
The Five E’s of City Service —
EQUITY — this did not happen for District 3 residents. We were told from the start that this was A DONE DEAL and we just had to make the best of it.
ENGAGEMENT — There were no community meetings or information about this project on THE FRONT END of the selection process. There still have been no communications with the public — ESPECIALLY the Spanish Speaking Public — about WHY we need A SECOND Homeless facility and a MEGA CENTER on 12 acres when the first one still sits unfinished with NO DATE for opening in sight.
EXCELLENCE — Other districts were included in the FRONT END discussions and planning for their facilities. Some determined that “NO THANK YOU” was the right answer and the City accepted that. Others, said “YES”. BUT the process was transparent, timely, and inclusive of all stakeholders. In District 3, we were invited to a “vendor fair” to meet potential service providers for this facility we had NO SAY IN.
EMPATHY — At the only public meeting held at Kiest Park, about 300 residents came to voice their objections to the project, but MOSTLY AGAINST THE PROCESS. The City Manager and Councilman were described as rude and disrespectful to the citizens who came out.
ENGAGEMENT — Staff has yet to develop Spanish Language communications or make any attempts to reach out to residents who live immediately adjacent to the 12-acre site. The Work Group has been reestablished with representatives from the school, library, and abutting Council Districts, but no Latino members from the adjacent neighborhoods.
ETHICS — Clearly there are TWO different standards for how the staff and City Manager view Southern Sector residents and neighborhoods compared to the process and treatment they give to other parts of Dallas. AND even if the sitting councilman shows contempt for his constituents, the staff and City Manager have an ethical DUTY to provide the HIGHER STANDARD of service to citizens and taxpayers. THAT did not happen here. Even the courtesy of a reply to our emails and phone calls did not happen.
Amen!