Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Neighborhood Market in an actual neighborhood

South Hemphill Heights Berry & Hemphill Streets Berry/Hemphill Urban Village Urban Villages Berry Street Initiative

  • Please log in to reply
145 replies to this topic

#101 ramjet

ramjet

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,075 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 04 April 2013 - 01:18 PM

To me, the idea of working class urbanism in the US would be evident in many of the smaller cities in the Northeast, such as Elizabeth, New Jersey:

 

http://maps.google.c...2,141.4,,0,3.57



#102 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,126 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 04 April 2013 - 01:32 PM

All "New Urbanism" is about is the physical form - it has nothing to do with chic, high-end shops and the like.  The fact that it has mostly been done in the US in areas where that has been the sort of business that moves in has to do with economics and land prices and the like, but that doesn't mean that low-income areas are not appropriate for walkable development or wouldn't benefit from it.  Indeed, low-income areas stand to benefit HUGELY from it, because continuing to create forms of development that virtually REQUIRE a private automobile to use comfortably just further ties low-income families and individuals to a massive sink of money in the form of their car.

 

This would have been a good place to showcase that walkable development doesn't have to mean expensive, but that opportunity has been missed now.


--

Kara B.

 


#103 Russ Graham

Russ Graham

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baltimore

Posted 05 April 2013 - 11:33 AM

http://fwbusinesspre...tax-breaks.aspx

 

"Wal-Mart is seeking sales tax rebates on existing operations."

 

Tell me more about big-box stores being so much more profitable and better for the community than the dozens of smaller stores they replace.... if they're so profitable and efficient, why do they have to ask for municipal handouts?



#104 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 04:53 PM

I agree entirely with the points others have made about urbanism elsewhere and its compatibility with the needs of low income people as well as blue collar people.  But I wouldn't categorize that as "New Urbanism" - those are places where traditional urbanism never died out.  My understanding is that New Urbanism seeks to introduce urbanism to areas where it never existed or to reintroduce it to areas where it once existed but died out.  

 

And Kevin makes a great point about the benefit to low income people with regard to the high expense of obtaining and maintaining a car.  I personally lived that - the financially precarious existence I had in Boston when I was 18 years old would have been impossible in a city where one needed a car to get around.  And for a low income person in Dallas/Fort Worth with little or no savings a car breakdown is more than an expensive inconvenience - it is a nightmare.  Not only does it require an expensive repair bill for some it means missing work which is an additional cost and sometimes might even mean losing a job altogether.

 

But all of what I have just said is utterly irrelevant and totally academic to some young, high school educated couple living near Hemphill trying to raise a couple of kids and the father, let's say, drives every day to an entry level call center job in Arlington where he earns maybe $10.50 per hour plus benefits.  But the job offers overtime on a regular basis - and he always signs up for as much as they will let him work.  And on his days off when the weather permits he is able to sometimes pick up odd under-the-table work he hears about from buddies who work in roofing, fencing and landscaping.  And the mom holds down a couple of part time retail jobs at Hulen mall and three nights a week she has an under-the-table job as the cleaning lady in some company's office on the Westside.   And during the days and hours their work schedules overlap the kids are with grandma who lives nearby.

 

Now, why on earth would the desires and visions of those who oppose the Neighborhood Market be of concern to such a couple?   The fact that urbanism provides certain advantages to similar people in other cities and might here someday in the distant future means nothing to this particular couple - because tomorrow morning he is going to have to wake up and get in his car to Arlington and she to Hulen Mall so that they can pay the bills and put food on the table. 

 

Walkable neighborhood?   Between the jobs and the kids they have precious little leisure time - and they probably have little desire to spend it walking.  Unlike those who are more affluent, they don't have the ability to outsource work such as cooking, cleaning, laundry, repairs, etc.in order to free up time for leisure.  

 

Shopping and dining within walking distance?  For them, shopping is but one more chore to do and one without the recreational component that many who are more affluent enjoy.  For them shopping is something that tends to happen around payday and is limited to essentials that they try to buy for as little money possible - which means shopping in the type of stores that operate on a high volume/low markup model and rely on large numbers of customers arriving by car who want to be able to park with minimal hassle. 

 

Dining out?  For them that is a rare treat mostly for the benefit of the kids at a place such as McDonalds, CiCis or Braums where the prices are cheap and their kids are not considered by the staff to be a nuisance.  For them, "fine dining" was the time the husband won a $30 Olive Garden gift certificate at work which they enjoyed on a rare day when both had the same off day at work and the kids were being looked after by grandma.  For them that was a rare touch of luxury - and the first time the two of them had dined together alone in months.

 

Our city and region is filled with countless people who live lives similar to what I just described - including a great many who aren't even low income.   Their day to day needs are simply not compatible with the reality of what any local "urban village" is going to be able to offer them anytime in the foreseeable future.   That the urban village might be of benefit if it comes to fruition years from now is meaningless.   These people have to live their lives in the here and now - they can't just go into suspended animation and wait until some utopia emerges. 

 

Meanwhile, a nearby Neighborhood Market will benefit their lives in the here and now. If the store manages to shave a few extra dollars per week off their grocery bill, then their standard of living has gone up by that much just as if their employer suddenly gave them a surprise bonus or pay raise.  If it means not having to drive out to the suburbs to shop or to a more distant affordable grocery store then the hours and minutes saved is a bit more precious time added to their day for other chores or for leisure.  Oh, and yes, they will want the Neighborhood Market to have convenient parking even if the store is but a few blocks away from their house.   They have neither the time nor the desire to lug a week's worth of groceries in their arms over that sort of distance while minding the kids and making sure they cross the street safely.   And they certainly don't have the leisure or the desire to do their shopping on a daily basis.

 

So when people in the neighborhood say that if the Neighborhood Market fails to conform to their aesthetic desires they are willing to see the store not built at all - why on earth should this couple support those neighbors?   Maybe those neighbors have great aesthetic taste - but they sure don't have this couples' interests at heart.

 

Now, I can also just as easily come up with another low-income couple for whom a walkable neighborhood would be very welcome.  In this case they are simply too poor to be able to scrape up the up front money for a car and for the insurance.   Thus, even though the father could earn more money and have better career prospects with jobs he is qualified for elsewhere, his job search was limited to ones he could get to on the T.  So he works at a company near the bus line on the Westside (and, because of the time spent waiting for bus transfers, has a longer commute than does the other fellow who drives to Arlington).  And since this couple does not have grandma nearby, mom has to stay home to watch the young kids.   A walkable neighborhood would be a godsend for such a couple.   Being able to lug a week's worth of groceries home a few blocks might be a pain - but it sure beats having to lug them and a couple of kids while waiting for and riding a bus or having to be at the mercy of finding friends or acquaintances with cars who are willing to drive them to a supermarket.   And, since the Walmart is to be open 24 hours, perhaps the mom might even be able to land a part time job at the store and earn some much needed money during the evening and weekend hours when the father is home from work and can look over the kids.

 

But, here too, why on earth should this couple support their supposedly "pro-walkable neighborhood" neighbors who would prefer the store not be built at all simply because it does not conform to their aesthetic desires?   Again, maybe those neighbors have great aesthetic taste - but they sure don't have the needs of this couple at heart, a couple who really needs a walkable neighborhood that offers very basic essential amenities that their more affluent, urban village advocating neighbors currently drive to and take for granted.

 

The simple fact is that neighborhood instantly becomes vastly more walkable the very moment that the Neighborhood Market opens its doors  - parking lot and all.  It is all a matter of how you define "walkable."   If by "walkable" you mean a pleasurable stroll to get some "fair trade" latte, or dine at a vegan joint or a top rated gourmet restaurant or to buy some high price, high quality specialty groceries and to patronize other cool establishments, well, that is Magnolia.  I like Magnolia.  But that kind of "walkable" is useless to the vast majority of people who live in North Texas. 

 

If the goal is to have a neighborhood where one can live without a car being an absolute necessity for living a normal life, then for the vast majority of people, having a Neighborhood Market, a Dollar General and a Walgreens all within walking distance would go far more towards making such a neighborhood a reality than would three Magnolias.   Maybe the fact that high volume retailers cannot survive in this area on foot traffic alone and thus require parking lots large enough to handle peak shopping hours disqualifies them as "urban village" material - but they are what makes a neighborhood walkable if one' standard is being able to live without a car.   If so - then perhaps the goal of the urban village is but a selective type of walkability.

 

And there is absolutely nothing about the parking lot in front of the Neighborhood Market that will prevent those who wish to walk to it from doing so.  Exactly what is there that is going to stop someone who wishes to do so?   No - it is not going to be as aesthetically pleasurable as walking down Magnolia.  But people don't go to a Neighborhood Market for pleasure.  For most people it is an errand - an errand that they usually wish to get done with as quickly as possible so they can get back to their lives.  People shop there for entirely different motives than one has for patronizing a business on Magnolia.  Magnolia is a leisure and entertainment district - and its aesthetics and it being "pedestrian friendly" is what creates its ambiance.   if visitors from another part of town have trouble finding a parking space on Magnolia and end up having to walk a few blocks they don't mind because that is part of the charm and the experience and they are not in a hurry because going there is a leisure time activity to begin with.  But there is nothing charming or pleasurable about wasting an extra five or ten minutes of one's precious free time dealing with more hassle than there already is in having to pick up a jug of milk and some laundry detergent at a Neighborhood Market.

 

That is why I say that there is a certain elitism in conversations about New Urbanism and things like "urban villages."  In conversations here and elsewhere it is usually quite obvious that the only interests they have at heart or even grasp are people whose lifestyles are compatible to their own.   There is nothing wrong with that per se - everyone is like that to some extent or another.  But that is not something that is desirable or appropriate when it comes to public policy.   And such a mindset is certainly not useful if one wishes to persuade others to be more sympathetic towards one's viewpoint.

 

I say all this as someone who likes urbanism and who thinks it would be wonderful to have more of it locally.   I understand the "dream" that the urban village advocates have - and it is a very pleasant dream.  But one has to live in reality.   In the real world, the North Texas jobs that people have to go to in order to pay their bills are scattered across a huge geographical area.  In today's world, people stay on a given job for an average of 4.6 years.  And when people change jobs it is usually based on factors such as pay, advancement potential or plain old fashioned taking whatever one can get.  

 

This means that automobiles will be a necessity for most people for many years to come - even if we went on an orgy of public transit spending.   The outright hostility and open contempt that many urbanists have for automobiles is not something most people share.  If that is what they feel - then so be it.  But to make it a center point of public policy is to relegate oneself to an elitist fringe - which is not going to help the cause of urbanism in the long run.  Most people do not look down with contempt on the equipment upon which their mobility and livelihood depend.

 

And another fact of reality is that most people do not share the urbanists dripping contempt for "big box" type retailers.   Most people decided many decades ago that they see no value in paying higher prices while getting less selection at a mom and pop store for commonplace, mass market type items.  And those who are willing to spend more for such items demand higher quality and seek out specialty retailers.  Today's big box retailers are nothing more than a continuation of trends started in the late 19th century by FW Woolworth and Sears and the in the early 20th century by A&P.   Read the early day critics of those firms and substitute their name for "Wal-mart" and you will hear essentially the same old drone you hear today.

 

That doesn't mean we can't have more urbanism.  But reality doesn't conform to people's wishes and dreams.  It is the other way around - if you wish to achieve your dreams then you need to start with the real world and the facts of reality and formulate your plans accordingly.   The reality is that, even if we eventually get highly walkable neighborhoods, there will still be many people within those neighborhoods who will be automobile dependent for years to come.  The reality is that if inner city retailers are not able to provide residents with the merchandise, pricing and convenience they want, those residents will get in their cars and get what they want from suburban retailers.   And the reality is that price sensitive retailers have specific business requirements in order to achieve the volume and operating efficiency to make a given location viable.  Such retailers don't build parking lots just to be mean or because they have a concrete fetish or because they are a bunch of unwashed bumpkins who drink the sort of coffee served in truck stops and gas stations.  If such a store does not offer convenient parking it loses customers and is eventually closed.  And such stores only have so much flexibility when it comes to store configuration and design - beyond a certain point, the costs are more than their operating margins can justify.

 

If urbanism in our area is to become something other than little Disneyfied enclaves for the affluent then it is going to have to find a way to exist side by side with the reality of our area, which means automobiles, parking lots and neighbors who prefer to shop at big box type retailers.  Such things have been a reality of life in our area for over 60 years now.   As much as some (including myself in certain respects) would like, one can't just turn back the clock to the pre World War II "Golden Era" (which wasn't all that golden for some people).   There were reasons why the very same people who grew up in an era where cities pretty much conformed to the New Urbanist vision later on embraced things such as automobiles and mass merchandisers and parking lots.  If the urbanist vision cannot effectively respond to the real needs of real people, then it is but a pipe dream.  If the urban village design standards are not friendly towards those who are in a position to invest large amounts of money towards actually serving the currently unmet real needs of real people - then perhaps it is the design standards that need to be reconsidered. Different neighborhoods have different needs - and maybe that is something that the design standards need to take into consideration.


Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#105 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 05:02 PM

All "New Urbanism" is about is the physical form - it has nothing to do with chic, high-end shops and the like.  The fact that it has mostly been done in the US in areas where that has been the sort of business that moves in has to do with economics and land prices and the like, but that doesn't mean that low-income areas are not appropriate for walkable development or wouldn't benefit from it.

 

 

You make a good point here.   And I do need to correct myself for suggesting that all New Urbanists are concerned with only the elite.  For example, there are the Katrina Cottages/Cusato Cottages, which are designed to be extremely affordable and which I personally think are incredibly cool.  But, oh my goodness, just imagine the sort of conniption fits that the Becky Haskins (who pushed to outlaw small houses) of the world would have it they were ever built here in Fort Worth!   And one definitely has to keep in mind that a movement's individual followers may not always cast it in the best of light.  Pretty much any movement is going to attract its share of dogmatists, wannabes and Kool Aid drinkers.  And I will admit that much of my exposure to New Urbanism has been from various advocates - and it is likely that there are advocates out there who are both better and worse than the ones I have come across.   And there are advocates that I do have respect for despite certain disagreements - and Kevin is certainly an example of that.

 

And there is definitely a reason for the economic factors you talk about:  Housing for those with lower incomes, unless the taxpayers are forking over for the bill or a developer has had his arm twisted, tends to be in older structures that have fallen out of fashion with those who are more affluent - in the exact same way and for the same reasons why the same people tend to drive cars that their more affluent previous owners grew tired of.   My guess is that the car manufactures could bring a vehicle in the $5,000 range to market - but it would be a pathetic rattletrap that nobody would want given that a nicer, safer and better built used car can be obtained for the same amount of money.   Sure, non-subsidized low priced housing does get built from time to time - but it is usually in areas where the demand exceeds the supply of older, less fashionable housing.  And, today, a certain amount of that need is met by manufactured housing.

 

So, yes, that is definitely a factor as to why New Urbanist type developments tend to cater those who are more affluent. All things being equal, new construction is more expensive than buying or renting existing structures.   And the higher quality design standards also bring the price up.   And I don't have a problem with that - I think the New Urbanist type developments that have gone up here are very charming.

 

But let's face some facts:  what we have right now in Fort Worth is not real urbanism.  What we have are enclaves of a sort of Disneyfied urbanism (which doesn't mean they are not great places to live).   Go to any one of them and you will undoubtedly find that most people who reside there own a car.   Maybe they don't use it as often as they would if they lived in the suburbs.  But they own one because, even in those enclaves, it is essential to have one in order to live what the vast majority would consider to be an acceptable lifestyle.    Perhaps there are a few hard core types who, by choice, get around exclusively by walking, biking or by transit.   But that is not the sort of lifestyle most people would consider to be desirable.  It might be in Greater NYC or Greater Boston - but not in the real world of current day Fort Worth.

 

You state New Urbanism is about "physical form."  That makes sense. But let's remember Louis Sullivan's famous phrase "form follows function."

 

And what is the function of a building or a neighborhood?  It is to serve the real life needs of the real life people who occupy and otherwise use such structures.   In other words, the form of a building or a neighborhood in Fort Worth ought to conform to the real life needs of actual individuals who live and work and contend with the day to day realities of the Fort Worth of 2012 - not the realities of someone's visions, not the realities of an urban area such as Boston or the realities of Fort Worth in the decades prior to World War II.   In other words, a building and a neighborhood is subordinate to the needs of the individuals who occupy them - not the other way around.

 

The battle over the Neighborhood Market was a battle over form verses function.   On one side, you had those who demanded that the operational functions necessary to operate a grocery store be subordinated to the form of design guidelines previously drafted up by some central planner who most likely has limited knowledge of what is required to run a successful supermarket in the midst of today's cut-throat grocery wars.   On the other side, you had those who recognized that, if a new store on that site was to become reality, then its form/design must necessarily follow certain operationally necessary functions.

 

Last year Ramjet made a great point in this thread when he wrote: "like Baptists, Mormons, and Muslims - Urbanism has fundamentalists."  Except I would say that it goes deeper than mere fundamentalism.  A lot of urbanists have a proclivity towards utopianism.   Utopianism differs from idealism.  An idealist might have lofty dreams and goals.  But that doesn't always mean that those goals are necessarily at odds with reality or are unobtainable.  It is entirely possible to be an idealist and recognize that one will have to contend with opposition, obstacles and the need for a great amount of persuasion.   The right kind of idealist can point a way to a path that others recognize as being in their best interest to follow.  

 

A utopian vision is one that essentially demands the subordination of every individual and, indeed, reality itself - and such visions make virtually no room for dissent and for those who do not share the vision.   So people want retailers such as grocery stores to move into a neighborhood.  But they don't want the store to have the parking necessary to make it viable.  But such a contradiction is never the utopian's problem.  It is everybody else's job to somehow make the utopian vision work.    Back in post 25 someone provided this as an example as to why Walmart ought to be able to comply with the design guidelines for Hemphill.  Of course this example totally ignores the very obvious fact of reality that screams out from the photos at the link: a glance at the surrounding buildings ought to make it obvious why the store in that Chicago neighborhood would not work on Hemphill or anywhere else in Fort Worth for that matter.  But what is a simple fact of reality in the face of a utopian vision?  How could such a store be made viable in Fort Worth at any time in the foreseeable future?   To a utopian, that's Walmart's problem.  If Walmart wasn't mean/really cared/was enlightened enough and/or wanted it hard enough, they would figure out a way to make it work - the facts of reality be damned.

 

Short of imposing a totalitarian regime, individuals and businesses aren't going to twist their lives in order to conform to some utopian planner's vision - thus such plans are doomed to fail to the degree they fail to take into consideration the facts of reality.   And it is no coincidence that, at the root of every totalitarian regime (as opposed to ones that are merely authoritarian) is some sort of utopianistic ideology that every single aspect of society and people's lives must be subordinated to.

 

I have no problem with New Urbanist style physical form - and I actually admire a lot of what is presented.  But form follows function - and like all architecture, it is but a means towards an end.   The end is the real lives of real individuals.    And, in Dallas/Fort Worth, that will mean, for many years to come automobiles, parking lots and big box retailers.   They are simple facts of reality that any sort of urbanism that might take hold here in D/FW must contend with and coexist with.  I don't see their coexistence as being a problem.   But I am not blinded by any sort of utopian visions - and I don't think of the existence automobiles, parking lots and big box retailers as being some sort of problem. 


Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#106 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 05:20 PM

http://fwbusinesspre...tax-breaks.aspx

 

"Wal-Mart is seeking sales tax rebates on existing operations."

 

Tell me more about big-box stores being so much more profitable and better for the community than the dozens of smaller stores they replace.... if they're so profitable and efficient, why do they have to ask for municipal handouts?

 

 

I can tell you why they ask for municipal handouts:  because such handouts are being handed out.

 

Companies justify accepting corporate welfare by pointing out that, if they don't accept such handouts, their rivals will which will give them a competitive advantage.   And they are probably correct about that.  I am not saying that it is justified - but it is what it is.

 

Politicians justify handing out such corporate welfare by pointing out that if they don't give such rebates than other localities will.   And they are correct about that.  The sales tax revenue that a major retailer generates for a city is huge.   Better to have a smaller share of that huge amount than to have zero share when the retailer decides to go to a different city.  I am not saying it is justified - but it is what it is.

 

The blame for such handouts rests not so much with the recipients or the politicians but those who made it legal for the handouts to take place at all.

 

The only solution is for there to be legislation that would prohibit any level of government in this country from using the tax code as a means of rewarding or punishing certain behavior.   It would mandate that tax policy be conducted as evenly-handed as possible for the sole purpose of raising necessary revenue with zero special favors, special exemptions etc.   I don't have a problem with certain basic, across the board exemptions such as no taxes up to a certain threshold of income, homestead and senior citizen exemptions on property taxes or even charitable contributions.   But everything else ought to go - the same tax rates and same tax policy ought to apply to everybody.   If a state or a city wants to be competitive over other localities from a tax standpoint - great.   But those competitive rates need to apply across the board to anyone and everyone - not just those with political pull.

 

Unfortunately, there is almost zero chance of what I propose being enacted anytime soon.  In fact, the only way such a reform would ever be enacted is if the politicians were forced to do so as a result of widespread and overwhelming demands at the ballot box.   Politicians will never enact such a reform voluntarily - because the ability to punish and reward though the tax code and through transfer payments is the very root of their power.  It is rare for politicians to give up power voluntarily - it has to be taken away from them, usually after a great deal of kicking and screaming or worse.


Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#107 Russ Graham

Russ Graham

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baltimore

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:07 PM

Dismuke, you've said a lot that can be agreed with.  I don't have your stamina for writing - so I'll just say a couple of brief things.  First that you might be mistaking the way things are, for the way things must be.  Consider your years in Boston, and how you were able to scrape by with very little means.  That's because and thanks to the compact form of that particular city.  Also consider what might have happened had all the council members followed Burns's lead and denied the request for zoning change.  They might have been forced to comply with the zoning ordinance as written.  Or they might have chosen not to build, and another grocery store might have been built in its place.  There's no telling what would have happened.  So the choice is not between "Grocery store and no grocery store", but "the one we got vs the one we coulda had"...  my heartburn with this is basically that the council once again steamrolled any opposition, in favor of the business interests represented.  I'm not all that concerned with whether or not they are going to sell free range coffee or whatever, for the record, since that appears to be a particular bone of contention... :)



#108 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:01 PM

Yes, Russ, the compact size of Boston was great for me back then - though I suspect it would be more difficult to replicate today.  My "apartment" was a room on the top floor of a four story 1870s townhouse in the South End that had been converted to single room occupancy many decades before.  The bathroom was down the hall and shared with two other tenants on my floor.  This was back when the revitalization of the South End had just gotten started.  The other tenants were an odd cast of characters.  But the building was quiet and safe and I was extremely grateful to have found it because other housing options within my budget were rather disturbing.  I recently looked on Zillow what it would cost to live in one of the identical townhouses on the same block:  $425,000 for 525 square feet in one of them that had been converted to condos.   Think of what you can get for $425,000 in Fort Worth.   But even though I was dirt poor (I never actually ate at the nearby soup kitchen for homeless people, but things did get to the point where I had made discrete inquiries how to access it if things go to that point - which they, fortunately, didn't) it was a wonderful adventure and a completely different world for an 18 year old who grew up in suburban Dallas.

 

But it will be decades - if ever - before anything like that could be achieved here in Fort Worth.  We just don't have the density or the critical mass - and, unless we have some fabulous economic boom the likes of which we have never seen (and I don't see any evidence that will happen any time in the foreseeable future) it will take years for us to acquire it.

 

On the other hand, some parts of the city might very well be able to achieve a similar sort of walkability that once existed here prior to World War 2 - but even that will take time.

 

As for what would have happened had the counsel denied the zoning request - well, we know what would have happened:  Walmart would have located the store inside the crappy old Safeway building, in which case nobody would have benefited.

 

But, for the sake of discussion, let's just say that rehabbing the old Safeway was not an option.  If Walmart, of all companies, could not make an economically viable deal within the design guidelines what makes anyone think that some other grocery store operator would be able to?   How many of them have the deep pockets that Walmart does?

 

It was mentioned in the thread that HEB was interested in the property.  If that is true, that is very interesting.  I can assure you that HEB would not have placed a Central Market at Hemphill and Berry.   Recall that they were also interested in a property in another low income neighborhood in Southeast Fort Worth before deciding not to go forward with it.   That makes me suspect that they are contemplating bringing a stand alone low price or perhaps a Hispanic format into the Metroplex.  Recall when they initially entered the Houston market it was through the now defunct HEB Pantry format.   For example, HEB is currently testing its own knock off of Aldi.   Perhaps that is what HEB is interested in bringing to Fort Worth?    But, if so, such a format has an even tighter operating margin than does Walmart - and it, too, will require parking.

 

Low income neighborhoods both here in the Metroplex and elsewhere have, for years, complained about the lack of decent, modern grocery stores.  Many low income inner city neighborhoods would get on their knees to bring in such a supermarket.   And observe, that it was not the low income folks who objected to this one.  That is one of the reasons I suggested that perhaps the demographics of this particular location were not ideal for the "urban village" concept at this time - because clearly there was hardly anything close to unanimity of opinion for one side or another.  Again, it is the low income people's neighborhood just as much as it is the more affluent people's neighborhood.

 

And the bottom line is if Walmart had walked away and no supermarket was built - the biggest losers would have been the low income folks, most especially those in the area who cannot afford to own cars.   Those who opposed the store have other options.  For those low income folks for whom walkability is a necessity and not a choice their current shopping options aren't so great.


Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#109 McHand

McHand

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 763 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Parks of Deer Creek
  • Interests:music, neighborhoods, kids, education, biking, politics, urbanism, food, friends, family

Posted 08 April 2013 - 09:41 AM

All "New Urbanism" is about is the physical form - it has nothing to do with chic, high-end shops and the like.  The fact that it has mostly been done in the US in areas where that has been the sort of business that moves in has to do with economics and land prices and the like, but that doesn't mean that low-income areas are not appropriate for walkable development or wouldn't benefit from it.  Indeed, low-income areas stand to benefit HUGELY from it, because continuing to create forms of development that virtually REQUIRE a private automobile to use comfortably just further ties low-income families and individuals to a massive sink of money in the form of their car.

 

This would have been a good place to showcase that walkable development doesn't have to mean expensive, but that opportunity has been missed now.

 

I am working-class, and I live in a working-class heavily immigrant neighborhood*.

I have often seen carless young mothers with their children and grandmothers alone schlepping bags of groceries across busy streets, especially around the Seminary area and even crossing I-35 at Berry.

They know about walkability.

They will walk to the Neigborhood Market.  While the design falls very short of real urbanism, at least there is one more real grocer in the inner city to abate "food desertification" on the Southside.

 

*Read: "We don't have a lot of money, but we have pride in our humble homes."

 

final edit: Russ you make very good points.  And as someone who is generally leary of overt sweetheart business deals from cities, I am now a little more disturbed about the development.  

But it will be nice to have a walking-distance store, even if the front of it is pedestrian-unfriendly.


Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD

Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna

 

 

#110 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:08 AM

Avvy, how are you disturbed?  I would be interested in your concerns.  Also, if you don't feel free to publicly share them, you can always PM me here on the forum.



#111 McHand

McHand

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 763 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Parks of Deer Creek
  • Interests:music, neighborhoods, kids, education, biking, politics, urbanism, food, friends, family

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:13 AM

Wal-Mart bullied their way onto the Berry-Hemphill intersection by playing the "poor people don't care" card. They threatened to use the existing building with setback parking.....or a new building with more glass and setback parking.  "These people need a huge parking lot!" they seemed to say (why parking could not have been in the back along Devitt I don't know).

 

What also happened, is that the opposition was outnumbered and did not adequately appeal to the residents.  Shaw-Clarke was for it 100% because we felt our time had finally come for a real urban source of food.  If the opposition had appealed to the individual NAs the aesthetics* and practicality of walkability, we might have a different building.

 

Because even I, as a long time member of this forum and resident of SC, couldnt at first understand what all the fuss was about.

 

Hey John :) I was posting this reply just as you asked. Hope it clears things up. 

 

*Environmental aesthetics matter.  See Jonathan Kozol's work on urban public school buildings.

 

P.S.  South Hemphill Heights, which is where the NM is, is actually quite a mixed-income neighborhood, so it is unfortunate that the "opposition with options" could not have made a stronger case for something better.   It abuts Ryan Place, with even more "options" and is Joel Burn's neighborhood, and Wal-Mart still prevailed. :(


Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD

Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna

 

 

#112 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 08 April 2013 - 11:21 AM

...  I don't have your stamina for writing ... :)

 

There may be a lot of good points, but honestly, I don't have the time or patience to read such long forum posts...



#113 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 08 April 2013 - 01:07 PM

Thanks for responding, Avvy.



#114 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,303 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 09 April 2013 - 07:57 AM

My opinion on this is of little consequence because it's not in my backyard, but I believe only time will tell about the efficiency/appropriateness of the design.  If the Wal-Mart design is bad, which it may well be, it shouldn't necessarily preclude more urban, pedestrian-friendly design everywhere else in the area.  I'm a big believer in the free market, not because it is mistake free, but because it generally (but not unfailingly) tends to overcome mistakes and keep moving.  If lower income, local, foot bound, consumers are generally better off with urban walkable retail environments, then (with a little municipal nudge) those developments with occur and be successful, and the neighborhood will overcome this sore thumb Wal-Mart.

 

By the way, the answer to getting small, local retail in these areas is not to just mandate that that's what is allowed.  It's to drive local business ownership.  Kids in high school these days have no notion of business ownership.  They don't know that it's an option, and they certainly have no concept of how to do it.  It doesn't even enter their thinking.  You have to create an environment where kids start thinking about owning their own businesses at a fairly young age (10 - 12) and take pride in their neighborhoods.  The rest will follow.



#115 David Love

David Love

    Skyscraper Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,735 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, gothic structures, Harley Davidsons, active with Veterans Affairs. Making things out of wood and carbon fiber.

Posted 09 April 2013 - 07:41 PM

That's a tuff area to do business.

 

I think any large cheesy supermarket that goes in there is going to elevate the area, for a time.

 

I would be nice if it were possible to allow a Wal-Mart to move into an area but only for 5 or 8 year leases, to be reviewed at the end of each lease period to determine if the company is doing good or harm to the community.


Better Business Bureau:  A place to find or post valid complaints for auto delerships and maintenance facilities. (New Features) If you have a valid gripe about auto dealerships, this is the place to voice it.


#116 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:39 PM

 

I have often seen carless young mothers with their children and grandmothers alone schlepping bags of groceries across busy streets, especially around the Seminary area and even crossing I-35 at Berry.

They know about walkability.

They will walk to the Neigborhood Market.  While the design falls very short of real urbanism, at least there is one more real grocer in the inner city to abate "food desertification" on the Southside.

 

 

 

 

 

I avvy names the issue very well.

 

A neighborhood being "walkable" is meaningless if people don't have a reason to walk there.  The Neighborhood Market may not conform to certain people's aesthetic ideal - but it does provide people a reason to walk to that intersection.  And, as avvy confirms, there are people who will want to walk to that intersection.

 

I could understand the sentiment of the critics better if the Neighborhood Market had been proposed on Magnolia, Camp Bowie or East Rosedale across from TWU where "urban" style buildings already exist and would be destroyed to make way for something that was more suburban in flavor.   I could understand the sentiment of the critics better if there was already some sort of small, "urban" type revival at the intersection already underway and the Neighborhood Market's design was a threat to that momentum.  I could understand the sentiment of the critics better if Walmart had proposed to tear down the dilapidated cinema and adjoining shops in order to build the market.

 

But at this particular intersection?

 

Here is a Google Street view of the intersection from sometime prior to the former Safeway being demolished - and you can move the image around to see and explore in any direction you wish:   http://goo.gl/maps/IYLqk

 

Exactly what is special or in any way unique about it other than the old dilapidated cinema?   About the only reason anybody would want to actually walk to this particular intersection I can think of would be to perhaps buy cigarettes or snacks at the convenience store or the gas station.  My guess is neither sells very much in terms of real food. Well - there is the auto parts store.  And I'll bet that it actually does see its share of walk-in traffic - from people nearby who have to walk to it because their car is broken and they have no other way of picking up the parts that they need in order to get it running again so they can get back to their normal car centric lives in order to earn a living, go shopping, visit friends, etc.   Apart from the cinema down the block, anything "urban" about that intersection has been gone for decades.  And if there is any hope at all for that cinema to come back in use as a theater it is going to need......that's right, access to plenty of parking.

 

What Walmart has done is given people a reason to walk to this intersection.   If "walkability" is the standard, then it is a huge victory for walkability.


Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#117 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:42 PM

 

I would be nice if it were possible to allow a Wal-Mart to move into an area but only for 5 or 8 year leases, to be reviewed at the end of each lease period to determine if the company is doing good or harm to the community.

 

Why on earth would Walmart, or any other company for that matter, invest a large sum of money into a location where, within a very few years,  someone besides its own customers will be in a position to decide whether it may or may not be allowed to continue to do business at that location?

 

And exactly who and what subset of the community would you propose gets to decide on behalf of everyone else whether it is doing "good" or "harm" to the community?  Those who are better organized?  Those who are better connected?  Those who have the most political pull?   Good or harm?  By what standard and by whose standard?

 

As it turns out, it will be the community that determines the store's fate - the actual community, as in the real life individuals who comprise the community, each acting on his own judgment.   To the degree that the store serves the actual needs and desires of individuals in the community it will thrive and prosper.  To the degree it fails to do so the store will suffer the same fate as the cinema when, decades ago, its owners were no longer able to serve the actual needs and desires of enough in the community to keep it viable.  A company such as Walmart can only have so much patience with a location that continuously loses money.  Walmart has closed down unprofitable locations in the past (indeed, it closed down and pulled out of an entire country, Germany, when it realized it was unable to compete with Aldi).  If this store fails to serve the community in ways that people in the community actually wish to be served they won't shop there and the store will close.    My guess is the store will do very well -  and will be very much appreciated by people who live nearby, especially those without cars, who will soon have access to a decent selection of food at reasonable prices.


Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#118 djold1

djold1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76179

Posted 10 April 2013 - 08:52 AM

Well said..


Pete Charlton
The Fort Worth Gazette blog
The Lost Antique Maps of Fort Worth on CDROM
Website: Antique Maps of Texas
Large format reproductions of original antique and vintage Texas & southwestern maps
 


#119 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:44 PM

Facepalm...

 

http://urbanland.uli...campaign=030314



#120 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 03 March 2014 - 04:30 PM

Our local government should have pushed harder and told them, you adhere to the guidelines with no variances or exceptions.  However, in this case, I'm quite sure they would have renovated the old Safeway store/Travis Ave. Baptist Church because that was grandfathered and an option.  I think most people wanted the old building demolished and felt that giving into their wishes was the best way to attract the new business and to get rid of the building.



#121 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 24 June 2014 - 05:27 PM

The severe thunderstorms that built into South and Central Fort Worth this afternoon dumped over 2 inches of rain in a very short time around Berry and Hemphill.  The Walmart Neighborhood Market was flooded.  Channel 5 did a report toward the end of the newscast and the parking lot and store still had several inches of water that was just standing.  When they built the store, I noticed the parking lot was lower than it used to be.  Now I know that it will flood in a heavy rain.  The store is still closed and it looks as if it will be closed the rest of the evening.



#122 cerebralshrike

cerebralshrike

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Niles City

Posted 24 June 2014 - 06:28 PM

The severe thunderstorms that built into South and Central Fort Worth this afternoon dumped over 2 inches of rain in a very short time around Berry and Hemphill.  The Walmart Neighborhood Market was flooded.  Channel 5 did a report toward the end of the newscast and the parking lot and store still had several inches of water that was just standing.  When they built the store, I noticed the parking lot was lower than it used to be.  Now I know that it will flood in a heavy rain.  The store is still closed and it looks as if it will be closed the rest of the evening.

 

I was in the area when this happened. There were talks of a tornado coming through.



#123 McHand

McHand

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 763 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Parks of Deer Creek
  • Interests:music, neighborhoods, kids, education, biking, politics, urbanism, food, friends, family

Posted 24 June 2014 - 06:30 PM

Reports I've heard said they would be closed for a few days.

 

I remember during construction, they dug such a deep hole for the foundation, that it looked like a basement was going in.  


Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD

Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna

 

 

#124 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 24 June 2014 - 06:56 PM

The severe thunderstorms that built into South and Central Fort Worth this afternoon dumped over 2 inches of rain in a very short time around Berry and Hemphill.  The Walmart Neighborhood Market was flooded.  Channel 5 did a report toward the end of the newscast and the parking lot and store still had several inches of water that was just standing.  When they built the store, I noticed the parking lot was lower than it used to be.  Now I know that it will flood in a heavy rain.  The store is still closed and it looks as if it will be closed the rest of the evening.


I guess the consulting engineers shoulda spent a little more time on the engineering and a little less time figuring out how to ramrod the project through Council and the urban village requirements.

#125 gdvanc

gdvanc

    Elite Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 899 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington

Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:03 PM

does any developer really have to ramrod anything through Council? or do they just say "jump"?



#126 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,657 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:26 PM

Maybe they'll pay their employees a decent wage to help clean up.



#127 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:35 PM

I think they just say "jump".



#128 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 26 June 2014 - 03:25 PM

haters...



#129 McHand

McHand

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 763 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Parks of Deer Creek
  • Interests:music, neighborhoods, kids, education, biking, politics, urbanism, food, friends, family

Posted 14 July 2014 - 10:47 PM

 I'm kind of tired of the hating on the Berry Street WalMart at every possible chance.  Can we move on?


Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD

Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna

 

 

#130 Dylan

Dylan

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,346 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 14 July 2014 - 11:23 PM

I finally took a look at that Walmart on Google Maps the other day, and I can't believe yall's responces.

 

The area surrounding it is suburban, surrounded by single family homes. How on earth did y'all expect an urban design in a suburban neighborhood?


-Dylan


#131 McHand

McHand

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 763 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Parks of Deer Creek
  • Interests:music, neighborhoods, kids, education, biking, politics, urbanism, food, friends, family

Posted 14 July 2014 - 11:34 PM

It's pre-war suburban.  The intersection at Berry and Hemphill used to house commercial structures that were relevant to people's day to day lives: a pharmacy was in what is now the Travis Ave BC youth building.  The Berry Street Theater probably had shops attached to it.  It was what we now call an "urban village."  It had amenities that precluded the need for a car.

 

Despite not having the design that many on this forum wanted, the store was built and put an amenity back into the neighborhood.  

 

And now, despite the huge parking lot, many people are taking public transportation from other neighborhoods to get to the store.  If anything, it indicates a need for better transit to the intersection.  But that is a discussion for another thread.

 

(edit for clarification)


Edited by avvy, 14 July 2014 - 11:40 PM.

Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD

Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna

 

 

#132 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,421 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 14 July 2014 - 11:43 PM

The area surrounding it is suburban, surrounded by single family homes. How on earth did y'all expect an urban design in a suburban neighborhood?


The Berry-Hemphill area is zoned as an urban village with the idea that future development will follow urban design standards. Unfortunately, the council arbitrarily waived the standards in this case and set a dangerous precedent that could spill over into urban villages that are further developed and far more important and high profile than this one. I'm torn on this one because it was a lose-lose situation for the council. If they had stood their ground, Wal Mart would have kept and remodeled the existing structure. In the end, it wouldn't have been much worse than what ended up there and it would have been preferable to hold to the standards.

And for the record, I'm not hating on the store. I'm sure it was good for the neighborhood in the end. I just wish the city council wasn't in the business of rubber stamping everything that comes across their agenda.

#133 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 15 July 2014 - 07:31 AM

Dylan, as Avvy said, the surrounding neighborhoods are pre-war suburban.  They are on relatively small lots and according to Austin55, the surrounding neighborhoods are in some of the more dense areas of Fort Worth. Also, this part of town had streetcar service.  Maybe I'm a little off target here, but I don't consider our historic inner-city single family neighborhoods "suburban". 



#134 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 15 July 2014 - 07:46 AM

Dylan, as Avvy said, the surrounding neighborhoods are pre-war suburban.  They are on relatively small lots and according to Austin55, the surrounding neighborhoods are in some of the more dense areas of Fort Worth. Also, this part of town had streetcar service.  Maybe I'm a little off target here, but I don't consider our historic inner-city single family neighborhoods "suburban". 


I guess they are in a world where we seem only able to describe areas in terms of either Urban (and by that, of course we mean those areas that look like or aspire to be like Manhattan), Rural (farmland and run-down towns nobody really wants to live in), or Suburban (everything that is built that is not Manhattan or a farm). We now have three words to describe every kind of settlement on earth.

#135 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,126 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 15 July 2014 - 08:11 AM

Yep.  That neighborhood may predominantly be single-family homes, but its form (where it hasn't been wrecked by bad development) is walkable urbanism, like most of the central-city neighborhoods.  "Urban" and "suburban" don't mean "skyscrapers" and "single family homes."


--

Kara B.

 


#136 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 15 July 2014 - 12:07 PM

What neighborhood-type tag would y'all put on Arlington Heights/North/South Hi-Mount?



#137 Russ Graham

Russ Graham

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baltimore

Posted 15 July 2014 - 02:56 PM

one of you FW historian types can please correct me, but I think the whole of Arlington Heights can be considered a "streetcar suburb" - which developed along the Camp Bowie streetcar line.  The key being the little neighborhood serving shops that cluster along Camp Bowie.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb



#138 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,007 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Hills

Posted 15 July 2014 - 03:09 PM

What neighborhood-type tag would y'all put on Arlington Heights/North/South Hi-Mount?

 

First ring suburban.  That's pretty much the kind of neighborhood where I grew up in Buffalo, NY.


My blog: Doohickie

#139 Dylan

Dylan

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,346 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 15 July 2014 - 08:10 PM

 

Dylan, as Avvy said, the surrounding neighborhoods are pre-war suburban.  They are on relatively small lots and according to Austin55, the surrounding neighborhoods are in some of the more dense areas of Fort Worth. Also, this part of town had streetcar service.  Maybe I'm a little off target here, but I don't consider our historic inner-city single family neighborhoods "suburban". 


I guess they are in a world where we seem only able to describe areas in terms of either Urban (and by that, of course we mean those areas that look like or aspire to be like Manhattan), Rural (farmland and run-down towns nobody really wants to live in), or Suburban (everything that is built that is not Manhattan or a farm). We now have three words to describe every kind of settlement on earth.

 

 

John, "pre-war suburban" is not a type of "suburban" neighborhood?

 

As far as I've always been concerned, Urban/Suburban/Rural are the three main types of civilized areas, but come with various sub-types.

 

The type of suburb I live in (post-WWII, car centric) is very different than this neighborhood (pre-WWII, grid pattern), but I would consider both suburban. They're just different types of suburban.

 

Yep.  That neighborhood may predominantly be single-family homes, but its form (where it hasn't been wrecked by bad development) is walkable urbanism, like most of the central-city neighborhoods.  "Urban" and "suburban" don't mean "skyscrapers" and "single family homes."

 

I would consider any neighborhood of single family homes to be suburban, though suburban neighborhoods don't have to exclusively consist of that.

 

As far as "urban" goes, I'm well aware that there are different types of urban. Downtown Fort Worth with it's many office buildings / high rises may be quite a bit different than Magnolia Street, Grapevine's Main Street, or Downtown Arlington, but all three are all urban (though they are surrounded by suburban neighborhoods).


-Dylan


#140 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 15 July 2014 - 09:28 PM

Dylan, I would say that "pre-war suburban" would really make that area suburban.  However, when you look at these inner-city neighborhoods compared to today's suburbs, they definitely appear to be more urban and dense. 



#141 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,657 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 15 July 2014 - 09:48 PM

And also easier to navigate. Pre war suburban areas lend themselves well to commercials retail streets.

#142 mmmdan

mmmdan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 312 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairmount

Posted 16 July 2014 - 06:43 AM

I would also add that since practically no one has built pre-war suburbs in decades that when anyone says suburban most people instantly think of the car centric suburb.

 

To say that the Neighborhood Market is in a suburb instantly brings to mind the modern car centric suburb where everyone gets funneled onto a main road that is too dangerous for anyone not in a car.  This means that every business needs a large parking lot to handle all their customers because the only feasible way to get there is by car.

 

The problem with the Neighborhood Market is that it is built in a pre-war walkable suburb where plenty of people can walk/bike/whatever to it.  The whole purpose of the urban villages was to return these areas to the way they were originally built, and the city caved and the Neighborhood Market ended up being more of the same.



#143 elpingüino

elpingüino

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 11 May 2022 - 08:05 PM

The Walmart at Berry and Hemphill is one of fifty in North Texas to be remodeled. Others in FW on the list are Beach and North Tarrant Pkwy., Anderson Blvd., McCart and Sycamore School, Park Vista, Avondale Haslet, and Heritage Trace.

#144 steave

steave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 231 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bryant Irvin + Vickery

Posted 11 May 2022 - 09:16 PM

If it's like the one on 183/Vickery going towards Benbrook, eh.. no thanks.

 

I guess it's better than nothing



#145 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 11 May 2022 - 09:44 PM

Steave, we have plenty of other grocery stores in the area.  I live fairly close to the Walmart at Berry and Hemphill.  I usually shop at Kroger on University & Berry or Albertson's in the Westcliff Shopping Center.



#146 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,007 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Hills

Posted 12 May 2022 - 05:10 PM

McCart and Sycamore School

I used to live very close to there,back behind the Walgreens on the south side of Sycamore School.  I was a den leader for my (now 31-year-old) son's cub scout pack; we actually toured the store when it was under construction as one of our cub scout outings.... so I guess it must be about 20 years old.  I think it's already been remodeled once.


My blog: Doohickie





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: South Hemphill Heights, Berry & Hemphill Streets, Berry/Hemphill Urban Village, Urban Villages, Berry Street Initiative

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users