Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Edwards Ranch - Clearfork Development

Southwest FW Chisholm Trail Parkway New Development Greenfields

  • Please log in to reply
360 replies to this topic

#1 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 09 February 2007 - 08:59 PM

I thought about putting this on the Acme Brick Topic, but it really deserves it's own thread.

The article is right, it could compete w/ Frisco and Westlake for some larger office tracts, I would love to see some Class A office space with new corp residnets coming to FW, bigger tax base, more jobs...

From fw business press:

Clearfork will revitalize FW office space

As the downtown office market becomes increasingly crowded, a Fort Worth family’s legendary real estate may provide just the outlet that some businesses need.

Construction of the 273-acre Clearfork development – part of the Edwards family ranch property in the western part of the city – is still a couple of years on the horizon, but the project’s developers are gearing up to meet market demand, whether that demand is for office space, upper-end retail or high-density residential.

Development of Clearfork and other portions of the Edwards ranch is being spearheaded by Cassco Land Co., founded in 1954 by the late Cass O. Edwards II to ensure that his family controlled the future of its historic property. The Edwards ranch once stretched from what is now downtown Fort Worth all the way to Benbrook.

If some industry experts’ predictions prove correct, Clearfork could find itself with a major office component.

“I am starting to see some pushback of downtown tenants. We’re starting to see some tenants look at the suburban market,” said Richard Minker, president of Fort Worth-based Richard D. Minker Co., which specializes in office leases.

One reason, says George Duncan Jr., senior vice president of Southwest Corporate Services for the Staubach Co., is that rental rates downtown have increased significantly.

“All of a sudden, companies find themselves having to look for less expensive alternatives. That sends you to the suburbs,” Duncan said.

The 2006 rental rate for Class A office space was more than $29 per square foot, with a total occupancy of 95.8 percent, according to recent data from Downtown Fort Worth Inc.

Duncan said that a suburban office project such as Clearfork also provides the space for companies that, regardless of financial reasons, just don’t want to be downtown.

According to Isaac Manning, president of Trinity Works, one of the co-developers with Cassco Land Co., Clearfork is tentatively slated to have 2 million square feet of office space, 1 million square feet of retail, and up to 2,500 residential units.

However, Scott Walker, vice president of Cassco Land Co., says the components of Clearfork could change, depending on market demand. He said the company is open to a variety of uses, including specialty retail, mid-rise office buildings and a corporate-campus setting.

“With a fresh sheet of paper, unlike some other possibilities in Fort Worth where you might have to do an assemblage, we have a chance to do something really special there in terms of a mixed-use or retail orientation, but the market will determine that in years ahead,” Walker said.

If Clearfork, which is the site of Acme Brick’s five-acre campus scheduled for completion in fall 2007, does develop a major office component, Manning said it will allow Fort Worth to compete with other communities, like Westlake and Southlake, which have traditionally taken more of the suburban office market share.

“One of the things that Fort Worth hasn’t always had is great office sites near great residential. All of a sudden, we are competitive with the traditional suburban community,” Manning said.

“We’ve finally got a site big enough to be able to do a corporate relocation deal,” he added.


In development

Clearfork is just across the Trinity River from Cassco and Trinity Works’ upscale 450-home Riverhills subdivision, scheduled to begin construction late this summer. Clearfork and Riverhills represent 600 of the remaining 850 acres of Edwards ranch land set to be developed.

A third part of the remaining land could become a mixed-use development to be called Overland, but Manning said that project is much more long term. The development is east of Bryant Irvin Road, west of the Hulen corridor, north of the Trinity River and south of Vickery Boulevard.

Road construction is slated to begin later this year, but the majority of development won’t happen until closer to 2010, when the Southwest Parkway, which will cut through the development, is scheduled for completion. Manning said developers have been working with the City of Fort Worth for two years to install water and sewer lines.

In addition, the western portion of Clearfork, where the Acme campus will be, has the potential for small office space in approximately two years, when Edwards Ranch Road is constructed, according to Walker. As for speculative office space, the group is open to the idea, but doesn’t see any more activity until the Southwest Parkway is online.

“Some of that is very likely several years off, because no one is going to want to arrive there in the heart of Clearfork until the Parkway is open,” Walker said.

Manning said the remaining 60 acres of the Edwards homestead, near Bellaire Drive and Hulen Street, are still occupied by the Edwards family, and that there is no push for development.

Boasting a convenient location, coupled with a burgeoning residential corridor, Clearfork should prove enticing to prospective tenants, Minker maintains.

“I think it opens up a brand-new opportunity for companies that want to be in Fort Worth,” he said.



#2 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 12 February 2007 - 12:51 PM

And, they'll get to enjoy the sights, sounds, and smells of the magnificent Union Pacific rail lines and yard.

As I recall from riding some northeast trains, they are usually in the butt-end of a city. Noisy and dirty.

#3 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 12 February 2007 - 01:48 PM

QUOTE(mmiller2002 @ Feb 12 2007, 02:51 PM) View Post

And, they'll get to enjoy the sights, sounds, and smells of the magnificent Union Pacific rail lines and yard.

As I recall from riding some northeast trains, they are usually in the butt-end of a city. Noisy and dirty.


I don't think the residents of Park Hill, Mistletoe Heights and University West find the trains all that annoying. I only hear them occassionally, see them less and I've never smelled them.

Besides, the yard won't really be in the way, just some of the south bound lines. no biggie.

#4 jmilam

jmilam

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts

Posted 12 February 2007 - 01:55 PM

QUOTE(cberen1 @ Feb 12 2007, 01:48 PM) View Post

QUOTE(mmiller2002 @ Feb 12 2007, 02:51 PM) View Post

And, they'll get to enjoy the sights, sounds, and smells of the magnificent Union Pacific rail lines and yard.

As I recall from riding some northeast trains, they are usually in the butt-end of a city. Noisy and dirty.


I don't think the residents of Park Hill, Mistletoe Heights and University West find the trains all that annoying. I only hear them occassionally, see them less and I've never smelled them.

Besides, the yard won't really be in the way, just some of the south bound lines. no biggie.


I agree. It's the horns that are the problem. We were touring the Tom Struhs development downtown last week and a train went by. You could hardly hear it as they were not blasting the horn. The unit we were in was right next to the train tracks....


#5 PLS

PLS

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Posted 12 February 2007 - 05:53 PM

My initial thoughts were also of railroad noise, but after looking at the google aerial i'm less concerned about a majority of that tract. i'm assuming the higher end residential will be centrally located in the tract away from both the rail and highway near cds. with some moderately priced residential buffering that from any commercial development, i think this project makes all the sense in the world. what family wouldn't want to back up to country day? i remember running a cross country race through the southern chunk of this land and thinking to myself that cds was lucky to own the land. obviously not the case, but i would be willing to bet they'd love to make an offer on some expansion land. surprised that hasn't been mentioned in the article. anyone have any insight into the cds operating side of things? i know several spc schools have either relocated campus or purchased expansion land in recent history, i can't imagine the thought hasn't crossed someone's mind.

#6 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 12 February 2007 - 07:59 PM

I agree the high-end residential will be near the southern end of the tract. I would bet the offices, retail will be close the UP yard.

#7 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 13 February 2007 - 12:58 PM

QUOTE(PLS @ Feb 12 2007, 05:53 PM) View Post

...cds was lucky to own the land. obviously not the case, but i would be willing to bet they'd love to make an offer on some expansion land. surprised that hasn't been mentioned in the article. anyone have any insight into the cds operating side of things? i know several spc schools have either relocated campus or purchased expansion land in recent history, i can't imagine the thought hasn't crossed someone's mind.


Well, CDS already found a way to acquire the land from the city that should have been an extended Bellaire Drive several years ago. Now connecting from Hulen-Bellaire-Arborwood-Bryant Irvin will be much less convenient. But, at least it is finally going through in some fashion in spite of the Overton Woods protests.

Anyone know when they will connect Hulen to Bryant Irvin via Stonegate/River Park?

#8 DFW

DFW

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 14 February 2007 - 04:10 PM

It's sad that central fort worth is losing its last bit of wilderness. I wish the city or state would just purchase the land from Edwards at market prices, and turn it into a state park. I'm sure the resources to purchase it are there, they already purchased a portion for the southwest parkway. I'm not a fan of the city council's drive to comprehensivley urbanize and increase the population density of our city. This will only lead to higher pollution, traffic, and crime. The new-urbanism philosophy sounds nice, but it doesn't work in real life; unless you want to set up an artificial community like Portland with a bunch of childless yuppies with median incomes of 100,000+ and median home prices four times higher than Fort Worth's.

I'm also afraid that after these developments are complete that the trinity trails will be too congested for extended bike rides. Things are already getting a little crowded and tensions between bikers and pedestrians are rising b/c of the narrow paved paths. I fear that high density housing all along the river is going to exacerbate this to a point where biking is no longer enjoyable or feasible on the main stretches of the trail.

#9 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,049 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 14 February 2007 - 05:14 PM

QUOTE(DFW @ Feb 14 2007, 04:10 PM) View Post

The new-urbanism philosophy sounds nice, but it doesn't work in real life; unless you want to set up an artificial community like Portland with a bunch of childless yuppies with median incomes of 100,000+ and median home prices four times higher than Fort Worth's.



1) What about this development will likely be even remotely New Urbanist? It sounds like suburban-style development to me, unless I've completely missed something. "New Urbanism" does not mean office parks. Beyond a throwaway reference to "mixed-use," *maybe* (and there's nothing in this article to indicate a real NU development), I don't see anything in the article that indicates a NU development. Unless it's radically different from what I'm picturing, I'm better there will be absolutely nothing urban about this development. New Urbanism is not about plopping suburban office towers down on former ranch land. It's a completely different beast.

2) New Urbanism is, essentially, just traditional neighborhood design with some new ideas added in. Saying "it doesn't work in real life" is, sorry, absolutely false - there are hundreds of years of human development that proves that statement wrong. Most of America developed that way prior to the '50s, and most of Europe still develops that way. There are dozens - no, hundreds - of places in the US and the rest of the world that prove that new urbanism/TND absolutely works. Heck, there are several places *in Fort Worth* that prove that. Actual, proper NU/TND - not simply "more stuff," as in this development, since it will likely not be urban or dense in any way (office towers in the middle of parking lots is not density, and that's the likely path this will take unless we hear something concrete from the developers) - can actually help solve a lot of traffic, pollution, and crime problems. It is the suburban model, forcing every trip to be a car trip, that adds to the traffic and pollution issue. And what's more scary to walk through - a street lined with shops and activity at night, or a blank parking lot at night? I'd far rather be on the sidewalk on Magnolia in front of Nonna Tatta at night than in a Wal-Mart lot at night.

3) NU/TND can provide for many styles of living and income ranges. Every NU project is not for the super-rich. And kids are very well served by real NU and TND developments - there are some people who might actually like being able to walk the kids to school, or to the park, or to the corner store. Maybe kids wouldn't be so fat if they could.

I'm sorry to say, but the suburban model is the anomaly, not New Urbanism or traditional neighborhood development. I'm not sure why NU/TND even came up here, though, as it will not likely apply to this project. I don't mean to come across as harsh, but I must seem that way - I just wish for Fort Worth to aspire to better things than featureless suburban sprawl, and I take this issue very seriously and close to my heart. Please understand I don't mean to be rude - this just brings out the, well, bluntness in me. smile.gif

- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#10 hooked

hooked

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 541 posts

Posted 17 February 2007 - 03:03 PM

Well said, Kevin. I completely agree.

When travelling in Europe - by car, of course - I once hated those winding roads in the towns and villages that never seemed to get me where I wanted to go. Now I realize that these places developed back when people walked to their destinations, and it makes a lot more sense.

We need to re-discover our past in order to live better in the future.

#11 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 29 August 2007 - 10:38 PM

I drove about the Edward's Ranch development between BIrvine and Hulen Ave.

THE VIEWS KICK BUTT! I want lot #47, or 44 will do.

DTFW skyline looks totally different from afar and those western sunset views are just KILLER!

I never noticed how hilly FW is on the west side. Reminds me of the TX hillcountry. A bit.

Any apartments expected to come on board? Upscale of course.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#12 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 30 August 2007 - 05:30 AM

CassCo told the Overton Woods NA that no multi family would be part the development. Single family, office, shopping and might be some townhome R1/R2 lots near the shopping.

The lots are very cool and the hills make it unique compared to some other developments.

#13 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 30 August 2007 - 06:44 AM

QUOTE(Thurman52 @ Aug 30 2007, 05:30 AM) View Post

CassCo told the Overton Woods NA that no multi family would be part the development. Single family, office, shopping and might be some townhome R1/R2 lots near the shopping.

The lots are very cool and the hills make it unique compared to some other developments.


Is this more sprawl development? Sounds VERY low density.

#14 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 30 August 2007 - 09:52 AM

QUOTE(Prairie Pup @ Aug 30 2007, 07:44 AM) View Post

QUOTE(Thurman52 @ Aug 30 2007, 05:30 AM) View Post

CassCo told the Overton Woods NA that no multi family would be part the development. Single family, office, shopping and might be some townhome R1/R2 lots near the shopping.

The lots are very cool and the hills make it unique compared to some other developments.


Is this more sprawl development? Sounds VERY low density.


It's tough to call it sprawl when it's in the middle of the city, but the homes might look like Aledo if that's what you mean. I think it's going to be very nice when completed.

#15 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 30 August 2007 - 09:05 PM

All of the lots I have seen appear to be developed single family homes. I drove the neighborhood this week and I was hoping to find a layout of the development online, but I haven't found it. I have a GPS based bicycle computer, so I was hoping to ride all of the streets of the development tonight, but that was canceled due to the rain. I may try again tomorrow night and then I will post a link to the map so you can see how all of the new streets are laid out.

#16 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 30 August 2007 - 10:11 PM

Wait wait wait...I think you guys are thinking of the wrong development. This thread is about Clearfork - the town center, high density, mixed use district...Edwards Ranch's website says Clearfork will feature 5-6 story condominium buildings. I think what Cassco was telling Overton Woods was that Riverhills, the neighborhood on the hill you guys are talking about, won't have multifamily. I would hope the plans haven't changed for the mixed use area...that was the part I was looking forward to! biggrin.gif

#17 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 31 August 2007 - 09:16 AM

That's a shame with no MF. Can you imagine the views from a 4 story upscale apartment. Good GOD!

I can honestly say that my initial view of DTFW from the Riverhills neighborhood brought me waay back to my Hollywood Hills nights (not to be confused with an AWESOME Seger song).

How tough is it to rezone MF on a certain 6 or 8 acres out of the WHOLE ENTIRE DEAL anyways?

But I also look forward to the Clearfork MU development.

www.edwardsranch1848.com

E RANCH!
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#18 Blue Panther

Blue Panther

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 14 September 2007 - 08:22 PM

QUOTE(safly @ Aug 31 2007, 10:16 AM) View Post

That's a shame with no MF. Can you imagine the views from a 4 story upscale apartment. Good GOD!

I can honestly say that my initial view of DTFW from the Riverhills neighborhood brought me waay back to my Hollywood Hills nights (not to be confused with an AWESOME Seger song).

How tough is it to rezone MF on a certain 6 or 8 acres out of the WHOLE ENTIRE DEAL anyways?

But I also look forward to the Clearfork MU development.

www.edwardsranch1848.com

E RANCH!



I guess the days of peacefull riverside bike rides are over...

#19 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 10 November 2007 - 05:28 PM

They put a sign up on the Arbor Lawn ext at Bryant Irvin advertising the area.

Further down past the new acme brick hq it looks like they are punching River Park inside the development.

#20 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 07 June 2008 - 04:38 PM

Zoning application for the next hearing shows a trac they want to convert from Retail/Hotel to A5 along Bryant Irvin near the railyard.

Seem sodd to me, busy street better use as commercial

#21 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 14 November 2008 - 10:40 PM

Last month they converted a tract from MU1 to E Commerical at Bryant Irivin and River Park for future office building. This past week at council they requested they rename Stonegate Blvd (just the Yogi's side) to Clearfork Main Street.

#22 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 26 April 2013 - 12:46 PM

As usual for Fort Worth this development is taking its sweet time coming about, but the bridge is finished... well, at least the vehicle part; the pedestrian part hanging off the bottom of the deck will have to wait a while longer. 

 

http://www.star-tele...ens-access.html

 

"Clearfork Main Street"? Is there a shortage of unique names? It sounds like there may be a demand for a firm to specialize in devising  meaningful names for new developments. "Forest Park Hospital"? That is a ways-away from Forest Park Blvd... hope that doesn't cause someone seeking emergency care from taking the wrong turn to where they think a hospital with that name "ought to be". The commercial part of the development seems to be sort of long and skinny, defined by the back-end of the rail yard to the north, bisected by high-voltage power lines and a tollway, a river channel to the south, and featuring a huge gas drilling pad at each end. There only seems to be two ways in and out, if a disaster ever struck (not an unrealistic scenario considering what is in and around that relatively small area) there could trouble for residents and workers leaving the area and responders getting to the site. It is good to hear that some of the massive trees will be preserved and that some land is being set aside as a place for events to be held. 2500 multi-family units is a lot of apartments but probably needed in that part of town. Not a lot of ways to get to anywhere else though; could be traffic backups at 7:30 and 5:30 five days a week. 

 

 "Cassco is known for its conservative and well-thought-out development plans, and developing Clearfork will be nothing but the same..." Is that real estate code for more sprawl? 



#23 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 26 April 2013 - 02:29 PM

"Forest Park", in the case of the hospital, is a brand name like Texas Health or Baylor-All Saints.  I believe they have a location in Dallas and one coming soon in Southlake.



#24 Tacoma

Tacoma

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

Posted 26 April 2013 - 02:45 PM

I'm a big proponent of an individual owner's property rights but it seems like if the City spent so much to provide good access to the area, more than 10 acres would be set aside.  Of course there's an argument that the tax base increase is enough of a benefit, and its the City's job to provide infrastructure, but I was hoping for more.  If I missed the part of the article that says more is being reserved, please ignore this entire post.



#25 jefffwd

jefffwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 27 April 2013 - 08:33 AM

Article in the DBJ: Cassco, Rosewood begin large urban project in Fort Worth

http://www.bizjourna...acre-urban.html



#26 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,845 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 27 April 2013 - 10:43 PM

"OMG! - good ol’ fashioned Dallas speculation has come to Fort Worth…thank you Jesus".

 

It looks like downtown has been leaped frog; why?

 

Clearfork to have 2 millions square feet of office space and 1 million square feet of retail space or to get our brains wrapped around it:  Clearfork = 11 Westbrook buildings; 12 Commerce buildings; and 24x the retail in Sundance Plaza.  Good luck to Rosewood and a big, big welcome to Cowtown.

 

 

The prototype for Edward Ranch may very well be the Carpenter Ranch aka “Las Colinas Urban Center. 

 

http://www.google.co...iw=1024&bih=605



#27 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,049 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 29 April 2013 - 07:40 AM

Based on the site plans I remember seeing a while back, calling this an "urban village" is playing *extremely* loose with the definition of "urban."  Unless something's changed.


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#28 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 674 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 29 April 2013 - 08:26 AM

All indications so far are that the entire Edwards Ranch project is going to be well done and high quality.  And Rosewood knows what they're doing so I'm sure it will be fine in the end.

 

That said, I think they need to be very careful regarding just how many multi-family units they put in there and where the price points are.  If the developer thinks they can demand the same rents as the 7th Street corridor on thousands of units, I think they will be sorely mistaken.  



#29 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,049 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 29 April 2013 - 08:51 AM

Didn't say it wouldn't be high quality, just that it has never struck me as an "urban" development.  When you use "urban village" as that article does, that means a particular sort of place, which the plans I recall for Edwards Ranch did not really fit.


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#30 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 674 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 29 April 2013 - 09:46 AM

Didn't say it wouldn't be high quality, just that it has never struck me as an "urban" development.  When you use "urban village" as that article does, that means a particular sort of place, which the plans I recall for Edwards Ranch did not really fit.

 

Sorry, I wasn't refuting your comment at all...those thoughts were just independent.  That said, if they're going to put in a grocery store along with the square footages of office and retail mentioned, and 2,500 multifamily units, all in that small space, that's certainly going to qualify as an urban village.



#31 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 29 April 2013 - 07:57 PM

Based on the site plans I remember seeing a while back, calling this an "urban village" is playing *extremely* loose with the definition of "urban."  Unless something's changed.

Are those plans posted anywhere? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#32 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 29 April 2013 - 09:23 PM

I thought they were on the Edwards Ranch website.

#33 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 30 April 2013 - 11:34 AM

Isn't it another insta-town?  Like maybe Southlake?



#34 urbancowboy

urbancowboy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 113 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Was Philly, now Houston
  • Interests:Sustainable, Livable, Urbanism

Posted 30 April 2013 - 09:13 PM

I think there are few good things out of this project.

 

  1. More jobs in the city, which is much better for the economy and strengthens our regional influence.
  2. Parking lots can hopefully be one day be turned into structured parking, addition office/retail/living space, and/or lined so they may be hidden.
  3. This also will creates a critical mass that may be serviced by rail transit, hopefully speeding along #2.

Although #2 and #3 are probably a decade or two down the line. Its better than what is being built out in Alliance or Mansfield for the most part.



#35 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,916 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 01 May 2013 - 09:15 AM

Checked the Edwards Ranch website. The Clearfork project is being "redefined," it says. Based on the color photo of a structure under the caption "Clearfork," the project may look similar to West 7th but not as dense, perhaps?

#36 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 674 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 01 May 2013 - 09:26 AM

So is Whole Foods still committed to this development?  It sounds a little silly to say that a grocery anchor could be a big deal for a specific development as large as this one, but in this case I really think it's a big deal. 

 

I had heard a while back that the developers of the ~35 acres just East of Montgomery Plaza were pushing hard for Whole Foods, so it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.



#37 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,049 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 01 May 2013 - 09:32 AM

Checked the Edwards Ranch website. The Clearfork project is being "redefined," it says. Based on the color photo of a structure under the caption "Clearfork," the project may look similar to West 7th but not as dense, perhaps?

 

If it's the image I'm thinking of, that's the new Acme Brick headquarters, which while it's a multistory building is basically designed in a suburban office park sort of site plan.  Nothing similar to West 7th, but on the other hand I'd not read too much into it as it's basically just decoration for a button.


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#38 elpingüino

elpingüino

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 302 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:43 PM

Found some Clearfork plans on consultants' webpages.

 

This one is from Cornerstone:

CLEARFORK-CHARRETTE-PLAN-800.jpg

 

and this one is from Trinity Works:

edward-42.jpg



#39 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 01 May 2013 - 04:28 PM

Drove the new road and bridge today. I expected more room for development. Lots of and dedicated to gas wells

#40 wfsmith10

wfsmith10

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  • Location:Downtown

Posted 02 May 2013 - 05:13 AM

I'm not sure that this will add any jobs other than maybe the construction related work that will be done on the front end. Any companies that lease space in this project are most likely already located in Fort Worth, and if they're not in Fort Worth I would doubt corporations would chose to relocate here just because of this project (no offense Rosewood).

 

I like to think of regional economies as a zero-sum game.... you have economic engines in a region that create a certain amount of jobs / companies. Any "neighborhood" job growth within that region comes at an opportunity cost for another neighborhood to grow and is not adding to the overall regional job count.

 

In this case, any companies that lease space in clearfork are likely just taking away from space that would have otherwise been leased in sundance square, 7th street, etc....

 

I think there are few good things out of this project.

 

  1. More jobs in the city, which is much better for the economy and strengthens our regional influence.
  2. Parking lots can hopefully be one day be turned into structured parking, addition office/retail/living space, and/or lined so they may be hidden.
  3. This also will creates a critical mass that may be serviced by rail transit, hopefully speeding along #2.

Although #2 and #3 are probably a decade or two down the line. Its better than what is being built out in Alliance or Mansfield for the most part.



#41 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,916 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 02 May 2013 - 06:27 AM

Zero-sum game? Yes, to some extent. Regionally, businesses may move from Dallas to Fort Worth, and vice versa. But at the micro level, you're assuming all things being equal—that is, for example, Clearfork and Sundance Square are equally competitive in the calculation of a prospective commercial client. We all know, of course, that one future site may offer a better market and other amenities the other does not or cannot offer. And you have to factor in the kind of business, whether a neighborhood bank or a specialty restaurant.

#42 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 02 May 2013 - 08:30 AM

 

I like to think of regional economies as a zero-sum game.... you have economic engines in a region that create a certain amount of jobs / companies. Any "neighborhood" job growth within that region comes at an opportunity cost for another neighborhood to grow and is not adding to the overall regional job count.

 

 

I think that's true in stable market conditions.  But, meaningful economic growth, which I believe is the goal and would not be "zero sum", requires among other things the right environmental conditions.  As silly as it may sound, an attractive business real estate development is one part of that.  Investors and entrepreneurs are more likely to jump in and start new stuff when it looks like the market is building momentum.  For example, I've always got a couple of new businesses in mind that I'd like to get started sometime along the way.  What will be the catalyst for actually starting the next one?  You'd like to think it's a carefully engineered model that monitors the business enviroment for the perfect set of macro factors indicating the right time to execute.  In my experience that's almost never the case.  It's usually the product of energized people getting together and deciding to go.  For me it's probably the right conversation at a bar with the right person who's excited about the market. 

 

"Have you seen all the stuff going on down on 7th?"

"Yeah.  That's really something else."

"That would be a really great environment for a small office.  Lots of young people close by, retail, restaurants, bars."

"You know, maybe it's time to start that web-based banana wholesaling company we've been talking about.  We could get a little suite in that new building."

"That may not be a bad idea.  I was talking to Fred at NerdBank last week and he said they were open to doing something in the banana space."

"Hmmm...  Why don't you make a call and see what kind of terms we can get on a three year lease.  I'll see how much capital would be required and see if it makes sense."

 

Two of the last three businesses I've started have more or less gotten kicked off that way.  It's not because of the real estate per se, but more of a sense of how things look generally in the economy and real estate is a really visible part of that.  You can get excited about things when you see building going on.  So, you wouldn't speculatively build 2 million square feet of office space on the hope that it would create new demand all on its own.  But you might expect new demand to account for XX% of the occupancy in the first X years.



#43 urbancowboy

urbancowboy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 113 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Was Philly, now Houston
  • Interests:Sustainable, Livable, Urbanism

Posted 02 May 2013 - 10:41 PM

I think the zero sum game is applicable here to some extent, but is much more the case in a Detroit or Philadelphia where the regional growth is either slow or stagnant, kind of the sprawl with no growth scenario.  I think here there much more room for businesses either to expand, relocate or be created.  I mean even with the rise and fall and possibly rise of Downtown Dallas, as place like Uptown, Las Colinas, theTelecom Corridor and the Tollway/Addison area have taken quite a bit of the regional share, not all of that suburban job growth was at DTD's expense. I guess my point is there we have quite a bit of room to grow.  Keeping more jobs in the core (central city) of the West-o-Plex is a good thing. Although, I wish it was Downtown.



#44 elpingüino

elpingüino

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 302 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 02:56 PM

This video has a close-up view of the plans at about the 5:10 mark.

 



#45 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 03 May 2013 - 11:20 PM

Looks pretty interesting!

 

http://www.lrk.com/cms.aspx?TabID=321

 

Wish I could find more renderings like at 5:30 in the above video.


- Dylan


#46 wfsmith10

wfsmith10

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  • Location:Downtown

Posted 07 May 2013 - 06:46 AM

Yes, but what type of business does that small office tenant engage in and what makes their market viable? What gives customers the purchasing power to shop at the retail, restaurants and bars?

 

The answer is (either directly or indirectly) key economic engines and employers that bring wealth into a region, i.e. Barnett Shale, Lockheed Martin, American Airlines, AT&T, Chesapeake, XTO (Exxon), etc. Micro-economic growth is fueled by macro-economic growth.

 

I am not suggesting that the area is not growing (actually quite the opposite), but rather pointing out where that macro-growth comes from and that key economic drivers can only grow so much over a certain period of time. Hence, the opportunity cost when chosing to develop one neighborhood (or suburb) vs another.

 

 

"That would be a really great environment for a small office.  Lots of young people close by, retail, restaurants, bars."

 

 

 

 

 

I think you make a good point here. North Texas is unique in that you have two cities competing with eachother and the suburbs over regional growth, whereas in most cases you have one urban core competing with sprawl development / suburbs over growth.

 

I would agree with you that there is a tremendous amount of growth going on, but I definitely think there is an opportunity cost between suburban growth and urban growth. As evididence, one just needs to look at the rise of suburbia and the decline of urban cores across America from the 1920's until the ~1990's. I think it's hard to deny the inverse correlation there.

 

I think the zero sum game is applicable here to some extent, but is much more the case in a Detroit or Philadelphia where the regional growth is either slow or stagnant, kind of the sprawl with no growth scenario.  I think here there much more room for businesses either to expand, relocate or be created.  I mean even with the rise and fall and possibly rise of Downtown Dallas, as place like Uptown, Las Colinas, theTelecom Corridor and the Tollway/Addison area have taken quite a bit of the regional share, not all of that suburban job growth was at DTD's expense. I guess my point is there we have quite a bit of room to grow.  Keeping more jobs in the core (central city) of the West-o-Plex is a good thing. Although, I wish it was Downtown.



#47 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 08 June 2013 - 12:08 PM

Tower Crane went up in the past few days. I am guessing for the hospital project in there. Brandt appears to be the contractor.

#48 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 09 June 2013 - 09:38 AM

I rode the Trinity Trail yesterday for a 60 mile ride and I noticed the tower crane up.  The last time I rode down the Clear Fork Trail was two weeks ago over Memorial Day Weekend.  That is the new hospital site and I have been watching them drill piers and place the rebar in the columns during my last several trail rides.



#49 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 09 June 2013 - 11:43 AM

Any renderings? How tall will it be?

#50 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 09 June 2013 - 07:12 PM

The hospital will be four stories.  You can find the rendering at http://www.forestpar...com/index2.html.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Southwest FW, Chisholm Trail Parkway, New Development, Greenfields

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users