Posted on Tue, Dec. 12, 2006
City's path to the future may be poorly paved
By MIKE LEE
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
FORT WORTH -- Traffic on Keller Hicks Road comes to a standstill every morning and afternoon as students move between two new schools and the thousands of new homes in the Villages at Woodland Spring subdivision.
There are no sidewalks along Keller Hicks, which is two lanes wide with drainage ditches on either side. The situation is so chaotic that the city paid $120,000 this year to provide buses for children who live near enough to walk to school. Two children have been hit by cars near the schools since August.
"It's dangerous; it's a huge accident waiting to happen," said Lara Lee Hogg, executive director of the North Fort Worth Alliance.
The situation is illustrative of a problem that occurs all over Fort Worth. The city has grown so fast, through annexation and redevelopment, that there isn't enough money to pay for roads and other infrastructure.
A $273 million bond package of projects that voters approved in 2004 is on schedule, but it's not enough to meet the demand.
The number of poor-quality streets -- streets so bad that they can only be fixed by rebuilding them -- has increased to 816 lane-miles in 2006 from 785 in 2005. And the cost of rebuilding a lane-mile has increased to $660,000 from $500,000. Nor does the city need only streets. It also needs libraries, parks, and fire and police stations.
All told, the city will need $2.8 billion to build and maintain roads and other infrastructure over the next 10 years, city officials say. City officials believe that they can sink $150.9 million into roads and other "critical capital needs" in the next four years without a tax increase. But it won't be easy and it will mean dedicating a lot of the projected growth in tax revenue to the road projects.
"It doesn't take much to connect the dots," City Manager Charles Boswell told the City Council at a workshop Monday. "There will not be as much money for public safety, or code [enforcement], or a lot of the other purposes that we've utilized that growth for in the last few years."
Boswell and the city staff want the city to issue certificates of obligation, which don't require voter approval as bonds do, for the $150.9 million. Under the proposal, most of the money will be spent on neighborhood streets ($51 million) and arterial streets such as Keller Hicks Road ($19.8 million).
The plan would also put $23 million into a new parking garage for the convention center and allocate $6 million for "premature street failures," which are streets built by developers that fell apart.
That would still leave about $10 million worth of failed streets. Transportation Director Robert Goode said the city is looking for ways to collect more from developers to cover the failed streets.
The city is also trying to increase the fees that subdivision developers pay to offset the burden that new homes and businesses put on surrounding roads.
Council members said they generally favored the plan, although there was some dissent. Councilwoman Wendy Davis said that the city normally holds a bond election before borrowing large amounts. A preliminary vote could happen next week and a final vote in January.
Also, the list of arterial streets includes only projects that are eligible for matching funds from other sources. That means some parts of town would get nothing.
Others said the city can't afford to wait. Any delays could mean bigger cost increases, Councilman Chuck Silcox said.
"Infrastructure is, has been and will remain ... one of our biggest problems," Silcox said.
Ft. Worths path to the future
Started by Dallastar, Dec 12 2006 09:18 AM
6 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 12 December 2006 - 09:18 AM
#2
Posted 12 December 2006 - 09:34 AM
I know very little of public administration, so I'm going to ask a sincere question, and all I want is a sincere answer. No soapbox speeches, no rants, no sarcasm. Just a dry, academic answer.
Where does the tax revenue gap come from? Is it related to tax incentives to get development, or is it related to front loaded expenses from new development, or is it something else.
I guess what I'm getting at is this, is it just part of growing quickly in general or is it specifically a part of the way we've grown?
Where does the tax revenue gap come from? Is it related to tax incentives to get development, or is it related to front loaded expenses from new development, or is it something else.
I guess what I'm getting at is this, is it just part of growing quickly in general or is it specifically a part of the way we've grown?
#3
Posted 12 December 2006 - 10:07 AM
I don't even have pedestrian knowledge, but my first impression is that the gap is a consequence of growth that includes quick, cheap growth with little long-term value. Cookie cutter homes on small lots and cookie cutter retail surronded by concrete. All fed by inadequate roads.
#4
Posted 12 December 2006 - 11:56 AM
I do not know the true answer, but I would suspect problems in the following areas:
1)Not charging adequate impact fees. A new subdivision puts added stress on infrastructure that is not necessarily within the limits of the development. Impact fees should be charged for each development in proportion to the cost of final buildout of the area.
2) Commercial development not commensurate with residential. If you look at cities like Westlake, you will find that areas with all residential and no commercial development are hard up for the ready cash that ringing cash registers and sales tax bring. Are the people in these new northside developments living in Fort Worth and $hopping in Keller?
3) Tax giveaways to Cabella's, etal. These corporate welfare schemes take money out of the city's coffers. Who's going pay for road maintenance when the whole dang city is a big giant TIF?
I could be wrong, but those are my thoughts. Another thought I have is that there should be no such thing as premature road failures. Developers must be held to warrant their streets and the city must do sufficient testing of the materials and construction as it is being done to eliminate shoddy construction and prevent failures.
1)Not charging adequate impact fees. A new subdivision puts added stress on infrastructure that is not necessarily within the limits of the development. Impact fees should be charged for each development in proportion to the cost of final buildout of the area.
2) Commercial development not commensurate with residential. If you look at cities like Westlake, you will find that areas with all residential and no commercial development are hard up for the ready cash that ringing cash registers and sales tax bring. Are the people in these new northside developments living in Fort Worth and $hopping in Keller?
3) Tax giveaways to Cabella's, etal. These corporate welfare schemes take money out of the city's coffers. Who's going pay for road maintenance when the whole dang city is a big giant TIF?
I could be wrong, but those are my thoughts. Another thought I have is that there should be no such thing as premature road failures. Developers must be held to warrant their streets and the city must do sufficient testing of the materials and construction as it is being done to eliminate shoddy construction and prevent failures.
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com
#5
Posted 12 December 2006 - 12:15 PM
Some of those people posting comments on the ST website sounded rediculous. It seems that whenever something isn't going right with someone's "quality of life," the de-facto argument is to claim that the government is corrupt. I think that if something is wrong with the current government given the current situation, it's that the city is overwhelmed with the new growth. Why do the city's intentions always have to be malicious? Do the people in N. Fort Worth really think there is some conspiracy at city hall to make their lives a living hell? Whose decision was it to move up there in the first place (and whose stupid decision was it to put a school on an arterial road???)
I'm sorry, but I live in another fast-growing part of Fort Worth (surprise surprise, there are other parts of the city that are growing...) and I'm experiencing the same traffic problems and the same "quality of life" infringements. But can I really expect the city to think I'm so much more important than everyone else to put my infrastructure improvements at the top of the list? I don't really know where I'm going with all of this...but I'll just make sure everyone knows that I think the city does have room for improvement (holding developers more accountable, being more comprehensive in its planning, etc.) and that I would like to see the traffic and infrastucture problems all over the city be addressed.
I'm sorry, but I live in another fast-growing part of Fort Worth (surprise surprise, there are other parts of the city that are growing...) and I'm experiencing the same traffic problems and the same "quality of life" infringements. But can I really expect the city to think I'm so much more important than everyone else to put my infrastructure improvements at the top of the list? I don't really know where I'm going with all of this...but I'll just make sure everyone knows that I think the city does have room for improvement (holding developers more accountable, being more comprehensive in its planning, etc.) and that I would like to see the traffic and infrastucture problems all over the city be addressed.
#6
Posted 12 December 2006 - 04:02 PM
Its about time Silcox said something right on the mark. This is nothing new and will always be with us. But what Fort Worth is gowing threw that most other cities are not are growing pains.
Johnny is right. Fort Worth is not just growing in Alliance. It was said last summer a Doctors Hospital is being built to take in the new growth in Southwest Fort Worth. Harris and All Saint have been in southwest Fort Worth for years already.
Fort Worth roads are being improved. What ticks me off. When me or my dad are in the medical district to see our doctors why is it taking well over two dog gone years to get streets in the medical district fixed? Im so sick of driving in that area!
Johnny is right. Fort Worth is not just growing in Alliance. It was said last summer a Doctors Hospital is being built to take in the new growth in Southwest Fort Worth. Harris and All Saint have been in southwest Fort Worth for years already.
Fort Worth roads are being improved. What ticks me off. When me or my dad are in the medical district to see our doctors why is it taking well over two dog gone years to get streets in the medical district fixed? Im so sick of driving in that area!
#7
Posted 13 December 2006 - 11:23 PM
I don't know whether this is the place to bring it up, but over the last few weeks, I have been riding my bicycle out in Jonny's part of town. I have been amazed at how many new additions have been built out there and also how many new thoroughfares have been constructed or partially constructed.
The intersections of Granbury Road, Sycamore School Road, Columbus Trail, and Summer Creek Drive have all been reconfigured. Granbury used to "T" into Columbus Trail and then offset at the end of Columbus Trail to continue southwest. Sycamore School Road never went through to Granbury. There is still a section missing, but it shouldn't be too long before it fully connects. Granbury now connects and becomes Summer Creek and currently ends at Risinger Road.
Risinger Road now extends west past the Southwest Parkway and is paved to an intersection with a divided north/south road. A new development called Llano Springs is being built around this intersection. I don't know what the name of the new north/south street is, but it shows up on the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan. It is not Bryant Irvin because that road is scheduled to be put in west of the current Old Granbury Road. Risinger continues westward being graded, but unpaved almost to the eastbound to southbound turn of Old Granbury Rd.
Hulen has now been extended almost to the 90 degree turn on West Cleburne Road. West Cleburne is scheduled to become Hulen once it is connected and expanded.
McPherson Blvd. has now been extended to another major north/south street that will eventually become Summer Creek Drive. Summer Creek ends at an east/west street that aligns with the northermost section of Stewart Feltz Rd. In this area, another addition is being constructed.
This area is really sprawling and I'm amazed at how many new homes are being built in the area.
The intersections of Granbury Road, Sycamore School Road, Columbus Trail, and Summer Creek Drive have all been reconfigured. Granbury used to "T" into Columbus Trail and then offset at the end of Columbus Trail to continue southwest. Sycamore School Road never went through to Granbury. There is still a section missing, but it shouldn't be too long before it fully connects. Granbury now connects and becomes Summer Creek and currently ends at Risinger Road.
Risinger Road now extends west past the Southwest Parkway and is paved to an intersection with a divided north/south road. A new development called Llano Springs is being built around this intersection. I don't know what the name of the new north/south street is, but it shows up on the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan. It is not Bryant Irvin because that road is scheduled to be put in west of the current Old Granbury Road. Risinger continues westward being graded, but unpaved almost to the eastbound to southbound turn of Old Granbury Rd.
Hulen has now been extended almost to the 90 degree turn on West Cleburne Road. West Cleburne is scheduled to become Hulen once it is connected and expanded.
McPherson Blvd. has now been extended to another major north/south street that will eventually become Summer Creek Drive. Summer Creek ends at an east/west street that aligns with the northermost section of Stewart Feltz Rd. In this area, another addition is being constructed.
This area is really sprawling and I'm amazed at how many new homes are being built in the area.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users