Dallas Apparel Mart Sets Closure, Move to WTC
The recently announced closure of the Dallas International Apparel Mart and impending 2004 relocation to the Dallas World Trade Center (WTC) was received with mixed opinions from showroom owners, including those who also occupy space in the Dallas Mart’s sister complex, the Los Angeles-based California Market Center.
While most felt a move to the more modern WTC would be an improvement over the existing apparel building, others had reservations about how much it would improve tepid market conditions.
The project calls for the closure of the Dallas Apparel Mart to come shortly after the January 2004 apparel market. The 600 or so existing tenants would then move to the nearby WTC, part of the 7-million-square-foot Dallas Market Center campus, which includes the apparel mart, floral mart, WTC and temporary exhibit space, owned by Dallas-based real estate powerhouse Crow Holdings.
The move to the WTC would create a 1-million-square-foot apparel mart to be called Fashion Center Dallas that would occupy the WTC’s 14th and 15th floors. The resulting merchandise mix of existing gift, jewelry and home-furnishings tenants would create a center similar to DMC’s sister complex, the California Market Center, where gift showrooms have been leasing space next to apparel showrooms for the past 15 months.
About 30 CMC showroom owners also lease space in Dallas, and most were positive about the project.
“I think it’s a phenomenal move,” said Fred Postal of Fred Postal Associates. “It’s a more modern building, and to be combined with gift showrooms would make for a more exciting business environment.”
Lynne Andresevic of Crayola Sisters said anything would improve current conditions in Dallas.
“It seems like they fill the showrooms there with whoever comes in, so the juniors are mixed with the moderates,” she said. “People get lost. It’s an antiquated building. Moving [to the WTC] is a great idea.”
DMC spokesperson Cole Daugherty said there may be opportunities for open exhibition space, a la New York’s Fashion Coterie show, at the WTC, as plans call for the 13th floor of the WTC to be used for temporary exhibit space below the apparel showrooms. In addition, he said the management plans to create “apparel neighborhoods” by grouping similar categories together to facilitate buying.
“We’ve found that about a third of the apparel buyers here visit the gift showrooms so we see a lot of potential with the mixed-merchandise concept,” said Daugherty.
Even DMC chief executive Bill Winsor admitted the Dallas apparel scene was in need of an energy boost. He blamed changing market conditions, including consolidation of department- store chains, decline of independent stores and private- label growth, which eliminates vendors and manufacturers’ representatives.
“While the trend in the apparel industry has been to scale back commitments, this plan reinforces Dallas Market Center’s long-term vision and support for apparel,” he said.
DMC officials said they do not know what will become of the Dallas Apparel Mart, but some tenants speculated that a neighboring hospital has been looking to expand. The 400,000-square-foot Menswear Mart, once part of the market center complex, has found new life as an expansion site for Children’s Medical Center. Another tenant said the apparel building would require a big investment to overhaul because of existing asbestos.
Dallas’ show space options may go beyond the WTC. While DMC executives were announcing their project, developers Henry S. Miller III, Paul Stell and Luke Crosland outlined plans to renovate the Mercantile Bank Building downtown, which they may target for additional apparel showrooms. Plans are to add retail, residential and restaurants near the building. The vacant, 60-year-old Mercantile is undergoing renovations that will be complete in 2005, not in time to meet the 2004 closing deadline for the Apparel Mart. But the developers said temporary space downtown would be provided until the new space was ready. Daugherty said the DMC is holding Dallas Mart tenants to their original terms, which means that they could have to pay out lots of cash to break their leases. —Robert McAllister
