117 replies to this topic

[RD Milhollin]

Groups want to limit growth
By BILL TEETER
STAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITER

FORT WORTH -- Neighborhood leaders in far north Fort Worth are meeting with one another and with city leaders to stop or slow the influx of apartment and town-home complexes into the fast-growing area.

The residents worry that schools in the Keller district and roads will be overwhelmed by new people that high-density projects bring, said Mark Barnes, president of Trace Ridge Homeowners Association.

Far north Fort Worth, bordered by Farm Road 156 on the west, U.S. 377 on the east, Loop 820 on the south and Denton County on the north, is among Tarrant County's fastest-growing areas. The 26,000-student Keller district's enrollment is growing by more than 2,000 students a year, largely because of the new Fort Worth residents.

"The rezoning for multifamily developments is out of control for north Fort Worth. These people need to make their voices heard ... or there is no way we are going to be able to control development," said Lara Lee Hogg, an organizer of the fledgling North Fort Worth Alliance, a group of neighborhoods banding together for better communication.

Developers say apartments and town homes are meeting a market demand. They say they want to work with homeowners on things such as walls or fences to screen their developments from neighborhoods.

Developers are going to exercise their right to develop land, but it works best when residents talk to them about what they want to see and to listen to advantages that developers are proposing, said Rex Anderson of Acres, which wanted to build a mixed-use development at Keller Hicks and Alta Vista roads. Anderson said area residents appeared to oppose the project even if it meant a better deal for the neighborhood.

"If they would sit down and actually talk about what you're going to do, it would help," he said.

On a recent Friday night, about 125 homeowners met at Heritage Church of Christ in Fort Worth to talk over their concerns about the proposed Riverside Villas Apartments on North Riverside Drive. Residents from Arcadia Park, Trace Ridge, Manor Hill, Heritage and Woodland Springs voiced worries about property values, privacy and traffic. The apartments would be built for low- and moderate-income tenants.

At the end of the meeting, a vote of raised hands showed overwhelming support for continuing to oppose the apartments.

Mark Brast of the Manor Hill Homeowners Association said neighborhood groups are not out to sink every multifamily or high-density development. His and other homeowner associations have said OK to apartment complexes on North Tarrant Parkway and Heritage Trace Parkway because they came with certain road and drainage improvements and recreational places for children who will live in the apartments.

Several projects are causing people in the area to huddle.

In late June, some north Fort Worth residents met with D.R. Horton representatives to discuss a proposed 560-acre, single-family town home and commercial development just west of Basswood Drive and Interstate 35W.

D.R. Horton's proposal goes before the Fort Worth Zoning Commission on Wednesday. Hogg said area homeowners have no objections to the developer's plans for single-family homes, but the town homes have some on edge.

"At this point the town homes don't follow the comprehensive plan," she said, referring to the document meant to guide long-term development in the city.

D.R. Horton officials did not immediately respond to phone messages seeking comment about the project.

Acres plans to build on the property at Keller Hicks and Alta Vista roads, but not the combination of apartments and businesses they had initially planned, Anderson said. A big-box retailer with some neighboring stores will probably be built, he said. No zoning change would be needed.

The Fort Worth Zoning Commission recommended that the city deny the zoning change needed for the initial project.

"We tried to get in a center that would really add something to the neighborhood," Anderson said.

Residents are also monitoring 10 parcels zoned for apartments, including the Riverside Villas site, a tract northeast of North Beach Street and North Tarrant Parkway, a tract near North Beach Street and Golden Triangle Boulevard, and one at Ray White Road and North Tarrant Parkway.

City Councilman Danny Scarth, whose District 4 includes far north Fort Worth, said he is trying to persuade owners of property zoned for apartments to rezone them or develop them for other purposes, such as single-family houses.

"I have heard just in general from most of the neighborhood associations that they would like us to limit multifamily, primarily because of overloaded arterials," or roads, Scarth said.

Mark Wolcott, a partner in the Riverside Villas project, said his project would have 192 units, with all but eight to house residents living at 60 percent of the median income for their family sizes. Generally, that would range from one person earning about $24,000 annually to a family of five with a household income of about $46,000, he said.

Riverside Villas would be indistinguishable from market-rate apartments, adhere to high maintenance standards and be subject to review by state inspectors for 30 years, Wolcott said. His plan calls for 108 feet between the apartment building and the nearest resident's property. After discussions with residents, he said he may look at tall, solid fences and redesigning the apartments to two stories. The original plans call for three stories.

"We went over the issues that had been brought up," Wolcott said.

Developers want to use low-income housing tax credits and tax-exempt bonds to help pay for the project. A hearing before the Texas Bond Review Board, which must review the financing, is expected to be scheduled in September, Barnes said.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Teeter, 817-685-3801 bteeter@star-telegram.com

[lens314]

I live in north Fort Worth as the article defines it by 820, 156, 377, and Denton county, but im in the Eagle Mountain ISD? When he describes it as Keller ISD? Is there a map of the school districts somewhere? The one linked from here is borked: http://www.tarrantco...?a=703&q=431077

[John T Roberts]

There is a pretty good interactive map that includes ISD boundaries at http://www.dfwmaps.com. You can zoom down to the street level and see where your streets sits within an ISD boundary. Each school district is color coded.

[lens314]

Cool, thanks!

[360texas]

Agreed the parent URL http://penick.tea.state.tx.us/ seems to be down.

[AndyN]

I don't know about you, but the loss of this park land seems like a negative to me. This area is going to develop and it seems like it might be a good idea to hold on to the parkland. Now, maybe it ought to be a city park instead of state, but it seems premature to me to be selling the property. It really seems that our state leaders are doing a number on the entire state park system this year.

State Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, has scheduled a town hall meeting today on the future of 400 acres of state-owned parkland on Eagle Mountain Lake. Originally planned as a park, it now may be sold to commercial developers. Representatives from Tarrant County, the Tarrant Regional Water District and Fort Worth are scheduled to attend the meeting from 6 to 7 p.m. in Boswell High School's Glenn D. Reeves Fine Arts Center, 5850 Bailey Boswell Road, Fort Worth.

[vjackson]

Groups want to limit growth

Riverside Villas would be indistinguishable from market-rate apartments, adhere to high maintenance standards and be subject to review by state inspectors for 30 years, Wolcott said.

Would the neighborhood residents be happier if the lower income people were in homes indistinguishable from thiers?? I've seen low income housing in many Texas cities that look exactly like many of the homes in some of N. FW's neighborhoods. Many of those subdivisons are the ghettos of tomorrow. Take a drive through S. FW, Arlington, Garland, Irving, and Richardson to see how quickly these cookie-cutter subdivisions become undesirable.

[JulieM]

It's really not the low income housing that bothers us so much, it's that the infrastructure out here is pitiful at best. The current roads cannot handle the current residents, let alone high density development. On Keller Hicks, Keller ISD has built an intermediate school and a middle school right next to each other to support all these housing developments that Fort Worth okayed without any road improvements. Keller Hicks is a narrow, no shoulder, no emergency lane and pot-holed country road. The schools open in two weeks with no way to handle carpool twice a day. Now KISD is going tohave to run shuttle buses from the neighborhoods to get these kids who live to close to walk, but can't because there are no sidewalks in place. Keller Hicks is going to be widened...whoopeee....starting in 2010.

The developer at who wanted a zoning change at keller Hicks and Alta Vista (catty cornered to the schools) from retail to residential was denied by the zoning board and this week by the city council "With Prejudice" to build his "high end" apartments. Thank God. It's so bad out here that not even a single family home permit should be issued until something is done about the roads.

[JBB]

Keller Hicks and Golden Triangle between 377 and I35 are ridiculous. Why they didn't fix that mess before extending Basswood and North Tarrant to 35 puzzles me to say the least.

[RD Milhollin]

I was driving out to a meeting yesterday in Saginaw and was suddenly aware of the appalling sprawl that is going in up there. The developments are basically all the same: cookie-cutter houses on long windey streets with two outlets to undeveloped country roads. There is only one way, in many cases, to get from home to anywhere, like work, schools, shopping, and because of the non-connectedness of one development pod from another, or anything else, the only way to travel is by car. There is no community center, no provision made for pedestrians or bicycles, few parks, fewer neighborhood parks. The suburban cities, through ignorance, inexperience, greed, or just neglect, are allowing themselves to be paved over by uncaring tract-developers who have no stake in the town and will move on when the project is complete and do the same thing somewhere else.

I agree with vjackson who pointed out that this cheap development is the groundwork for future slums. Perhaps we need some sort of regional (NCTCOG?) authority to set more sensible standards for neighborhood development. I would like to see a blend of housing sizes and lot types, more interconnecting streets to aleviate the "one-way-in-one-way-out in cars" traffic requirement, and some sort of requirement for greater energy effeciency for new houses. It seems stupid, especially at this time of year, that we don't have a greater reliance on solar water heaters.

I have to confess that I am reading a Duany/Plater-Zyberk book righ now so I am probably hyper sensitive to sprawl development. I am sure it will wear off and I will return to normal droned-out complacency soon.

[Keller Pirate]

Lots of good replies on why growth needs to be limited. Schools, roads, sidewalks. As I said some months ago we will know when Ft Worth has matured when Jonny is in favor of growth limits.

One of the best reasons to limit growth hasn't been mentioned here yet, Water. In California connection to the water system is a popular way to limit growth. There are communities that have a waiting list to get hooked up to the water system and you can't get a permit to build until your number comes up. In fact people with low numbers sell or trade them with people that have higher numbers to make a profit.

I would say that here in North Texas cities that are rationing water have no business issuing building permits for thousands of new homes. Is there a water shortage or not? If Ft Worth or Keller or Frisco can issue permits for a thousand new homes that will require a great deal of water then I should be able to water my lawn as much and whenever I want as long as I am paying for the water. Not that I would.

The truth may be that some cities are ponzi schemes. I have thought Ft Worth was this way for some time. They want the money from the new development so bad they are approving sprawl when the mayor says he is not in favor of it. Even though they can't adequately serve their new residents Ft Worth needs the money these homes will bring in to pay for projects in old Ft Worth that couldn't be done without annexing massive amounts of land further and further away to support the old core. When I say they, I don't mean the citizens or even the elected officials, I mean the bureauacrats that run the city. Now that their new patsies are getting wise to the scheme it may be over soon.

I say good for the folks that live in the area and are trying to do something about it.

[ghughes]

One interesting problem with the roads is that due to the hodge-podge pattern of annexation most of those roads pass into and out of Fort Worth. The other pieces belong to the county. So who will set priorities on improvement?

But I'll take issue with a couple of points made by my friend the Pirate. First, the taxes coming in from the developments do not support the old core. If you look at the costs to support the sprawl you will find that it exceeds the tax revenues. The "old core" actually subsidizes all that development by deferring maintenance of existing infrastructure, making do with inadequate code enforcement, hiring more development personnel, etc.

Second, it's not the bureaucrats, it's the policy makers. And by that I mean the elected officials. Of course their job is made easier by the lap-dog daily "newspaper" that wouldn't write a negative story about anything in City Hall unless the Weekly forced them to.

There is a huge body of knowledge about this issue that the members of this forum avail themselves of. Our elected officials prefer to pretend that it is not there. They will not make the effort to educate themselves on these matters. Instead they burn precious resources fighting over a stupid airport. I guess it's easier than thinking.

[FoUTASportscaster]

The truth may be that some cities are ponzi schemes. I have thought Ft Worth was this way for some time. They want the money from the new development so bad they are approving sprawl when the mayor says he is not in favor of it. Even though they can't adequately serve their new residents Ft Worth needs the money these homes will bring in to pay for projects in old Ft Worth that couldn't be done without annexing massive amounts of land further and further away to support the old core. When I say they, I don't mean the citizens or even the elected officials, I mean the bureauacrats that run the city. Now that their new patsies are getting wise to the scheme it may be over soon.

This is what's called unsustainable development, and the dominant form of development in the area, and possibly the country since the rise of the automobile. These types of problems were non-existant before then. Suburbs grew and "prospered" when they were growing in the '50's, but people would come to find out they don't pay for themselves. Arlington was facing a 17 million budget shortfall because of that and they couldn't grow anymore because they were landlocked. The exception is cities like Highland Park, I do not know the Fort Worth equivalent, Southlake a suppose, but not quite, since it is bigger and not as expensive on average. Those homes are so expensive, the tax to run them do pay for themselves, but that price level excludes the vast majority of people in America.

This is also why it is so important for cities to attract people back to the core. That means more people in an area that will mostly stay the same for municipal service, aside from water. There is no need to build roads, sewers, sidewalks or any other infrastructure.

[Buck]

Arlington has a budget shortfall because taxes have always been too low and the leaders won't raise taxes to pay for decent services.

Businesses depend on growth and more customers. I agree with planning carefully, but I do not agree with reducing growth.

[Now in Denton]

I was driving out to a meeting yesterday in Saginaw and was suddenly aware of the appalling sprawl that is going in up there. The developments are basically all the same: cookie-cutter houses on long windey streets with two outlets to undeveloped country roads.

I have to confess that I am reading a Duany/Plater-Zyberk book righ now so I am probably hyper sensitive to sprawl development. I am sure it will wear off and I will return to normal droned-out complacency soon.

Could someone please tell me more what is so bad with cookie-cutter houses? From Rome of 2000 years ago. To Colonial America to Aztec Mexico. Are not all development the same? I love seeing PBS This old house program and seeing restoration of old houses. And they always go look next door and few blocks from the house they are working on to get ideas. On earlier restorations. When "This old House" is in the southwest they restore houses that look "southwest". Or in other words the "same" as in the local area. And Colonial houses look very very plan. To try to dress it up. It would never pass Boston preservation ordinance.

I love Spanish Colonial and Chinies Houses but would look awful and out of place in New England America. I do like the new cookie-cutter houses for thier look if for not two things I hate. One The main door is tucked away and out of site. And yet the "Car" is treated like the "Man of the House" with the mega giant Garage door in front of the house. Second the cul-de-sak street outlay. The new area is like a silly maze. Fort Worth is by no means the only one to have this type of development.

North Fort Worth is being built on farmland. The basic needs always get built first. Just like Downtown Fort Worth or any other city. Their was no shopping center, sewer, or church at the Fort. What is the right look?

And as for the kids in other ISD's. Don't voters in that ISD pay for new school .No matter what city the kids live in? Kids in Fort Worth and Dallas are served by many ISD's. But thier ISD that they live in pays for the school's? Yea I know the mess down in Austin Don't help . Forgive me if im missing something or several points please let me know.

[JulieM]

It doesn't matter which ISD serves our children, it's the lack of a viable road to get there that is the problem. Fort Worth threatened to not give the KISD the CO unless KISD widened the road in front of the school. Eventually Fort Worth realized that KISD isn't in the road building/widening and last I heard they were fighting over who pays to move the utilities. Unbelievable that neither entity figured out that there was no way to get the kids to and from school. For the next FOUR years, they are going to run shuttle buses from the various neighborhoods until Keller Hicks is improved. I feel sorry for Sal our councilman who will be at the first parents meeting 8/21. I'm sure he'll get an earful and a half.

[ghughes]

Cookie cutter goes beyond style and into mass production. Every house in a broad area is at the same size and price, too. They tend to be starters or first move-ups, but either way they generally attract a uniform (homogeneous) set of buyers in terms of income and family size. Also a lot of people who are marginal on buying in. There's nothing wrong with that alone, but if anything goes wrong they can't get by. Then you get either desperation sales or foreclosures which drive down the market for everyone nearby.

Just a quick look at foreclosures by zip code (granted, a large area) using foreclosurelistings.com:

North, Outside Loop 820:
76131 (parts of N.F.W., Blue Mound, Saginaw) 33 properties in foreclosure.
76179 (far NW FW) has 38
76148 (Wautaga) has 34
76137 (North Fort Worth, Basswood area) has 68

Inside Loop 820:
76117 (Haltom City) 29
76100 (Old North Fort Worth) 126
76111 (Old Northeast FW) 18
76107 (West FW) 17
76109 (SW FW) has 4
76110 (South FW, close in) has 7
76104 (near S & SE FW) has 19
76103 (near East FW) has 16
76105 (Near SE FW) has 15

What does this prove? Well, that I get too wierd looking at data sometimes. But it also seems that those new areas have some bad stuff going on. Especially 76137. I know people who live there who can't move out because that new home has declined in value. A significant reason is nearby foreclosure sales and the effect on appraisals.

[vjackson]

Cookie cutter goes beyond style and into mass production. Every house in a broad area is at the same size and price, too. They tend to be starters or first move-ups, but either way they generally attract a uniform (homogeneous) set of buyers in terms of income and family size. Also a lot of people who are marginal on buying in. There's nothing wrong with that alone, but if anything goes wrong they can't get by. Then you get either desperation sales or foreclosures which drive down the market for everyone nearby.

Good Explanation ghuges. One of the reasons for the slow apprecation in these neighborhoods is a developer will come in and build a new subdivision next to another one that is a fairly new to a few years old. Then build homes in the new subdivison about the same size or larger, and similar in design to the "older" subdivison", but price them lower. This practice makes homes in these areas very difficult to sell and slow to appreciate. Thus forcing homeowners that want to move to abandon the home (forclosure), sell at a loss, or rent out the home. All detrimental to to the neighborhood. Also these homes become so numerous that many use mortgage companies that use some really creative financing to get people into these homes before they are really ready for home ownership. Many of these people get in over thier heads and thier homes end up in foreclosure. What so sad, is that this process of neighborhood deterioation doesn't take very long. I've been in the metroplex for less than ten years and have seen several such neighborhoods decline.

And don't mention the poor cost-cutting quality of these homes. They seem to be built to last 20 years or less. What one developer referred to as "disposable housing".

[Keller Pirate]

You should have tossed in 76248 zip too. I know that is Keller but that includes a lot of N Ft Worth also. Of course we wouldn't know how to separate the true Keller foreclosures from the N Ft Worth foreclosures.

Julie's comment about the city of Ft Worth requiring the KISD to pay for the street improvements in front of the school was interesting. Which brings me back to my belief that the city is making money on new development. Rightly the developers should be paying for the streets, water and sewer connections, not the city. As soon as the new owners move in they start paying taxes to the city. The city has to come up with police, fire and trash collection. The first two they can skimp on at first in a largely bedroom area.

Please enlighten me ghughes as to why the old core is paying for these new areas, you are not the only person to tell me I'm wrong. Yes they have to build new feeder roads but look how long it has been since Basswood went in, 10 years ago and now they have finally finished North Tarrant and we are looking at 3 or 4 years to start on Golden Triangle and Keller-Hicks. Not exactly timely meeting of the populations needs. Who is paying for Heritage Trace? By the way while driving on Heritage Trace the other day I noticed one of the residential side streets was named Moncrief.

I think I saw somewhere that the Ft Worth city tax rate is .97. Is that right? If so it would be almost double what I pay in Keller. The folks West of the tracks are getting hit for high KISD taxes and high city taxes. Is it really that much better over there?

One last thing for Julie. Did you see the story in the Keller paper where the KISD planner said the new state school tax scheme would not lower homeowners school taxes in KISD, increases in assements would offset any savings to individual homeowners. At least taxes won't go up.

[Now in Denton]

Thank you Julie M and ghughes. For your points. As far as forclosers they are the norm in a free market ecomomy. Im going to have to look at further into forcloser.com web and study how zips around Fort Worth -Dallas area stack up. I'll have to see how Dallas, Arlington has done with large new development's like north Fort Worth. My guess thier wont be any in the Fort Worth scale of mege development. But I'll see won't I ?

But again I have no problem with same looking houses other than the awful Garage door that stands out. And new houses be built to last. I helped my co -workers move into these new development's . (We have jobs in Alliance) I will have no better first hand look to see how my coworkers are doing in thier new house. Three of them moved two years ago. So far no problems. And four BBQ'S.

So if I got this right Fort Worth is being hard a## about roads? For thier Fort Worth kids goings to KISD school's? Is that right? I would say Both cities build the proper roads. And Fort Worth should just build the darn roads anyway if Keller is not willing to chip in and fight it out in court later. My guess Fort Worth thinks the roads will not be used only for school kids, and used only for kids 24/7 365.

But the moral thing to do is for Fort Worth to build the roads now! And that the other problem is building a school close to a major freeway. That kids close to walking distance yet must pass a major road. Thier is no other solution but to shuttel them. Fort Worth should pay the KISD to do this. Until or if another school is built on the other side. Thats my opinion.

[JulieM]

Yup, Keller Pirate, we are on the wrong side of the tracks. I read the story about not raising taxes but they are going to build the new high school here in Woodland Springs and are going to do another bond election.

Right now I'm not worried about the high taxes as we are dreaded renters. My husband's contract is for one year and we'd be stupid to buy. Now if it is extended, we will buy. As for renters being detrimental to neighborhoods, I beg to differ. We took a house that had been on the market for a long time. By taking it off the market, it was not sold at a lower price thus lowering the property values. Don't blame the renters, blame the landlords who don't enforce the lease. We have done more work fixing the yard of an owner who couldn't afford the house nor the upkeep. I'd say my house and yard is better looking than 90 percent of the homes on the street.

Golden Triangle has been fast tracked and work is progressing extremely slow. Keller hicks has more houses and should have gone first because of the schools.

The developer here in Woodland Springs put up the crappiest of roads. Our house is two years old and the road is falling apart. I will give FW a little credit because two weeks ago two public works guys came by and threw four shovelfuls of asphalt into a hole in front of our house out of the back of a dump truck and tapped it down with their shovels...how impressive. We went out and swept up the wayward gravel.

[vjackson]

As for renters being detrimental to neighborhoods, I beg to differ. We took a house that had been on the market for a long time. By taking it off the market, it was not sold at a lower price thus lowering the property values. Don't blame the renters, blame the landlords who don't enforce the lease. We have done more work fixing the yard of an owner who couldn't afford the house nor the upkeep. I'd say my house and yard is better looking than 90 percent of the homes on the street.

Didn't mean to imply renters themselves are detrimental as I am a renter also, and can't stand when people assume I don't care about the property or the neighborhood around me. It's more of perception thing as too many rental homes in a neighborhood does lower values. The situation with your home becoming a rental is indicative of the problem I discribed earlier with many homeowners in sprawl-divisions. Do you by chance know how many homes on your street are rental???

[JulieM]

I have no idea how many are rentals, but the amount for sale is just staggering. One neighbor across the street and down is facing foreclosure because they overbought. The house next door is for sale and my child when walking the dog collects the flyers from the houses for sale. We are up to ten on his regular walk. I think the reason people don't buy existing homes ins these developing neighborhoods is because of builder incentives and the ability to personalize the their own home. Our landlord spent 35K in upgrades on the interior but failed to water the yard. Woo hoo, nice cabinets but cringe when I round the curb and see the grass.

FW needs to fast track these roads. Keller is educating all these kids in the FW city limits but FW does nothing to get them to the schools. I can't believe we will be putting our child on a bus to a school a mile away. Don't even get me started on the safety of putting a child on a non-seat belted bus.

[vjackson]

I have no idea how many are rentals, but the amount for sale is just staggering. One neighbor across the street and down is facing foreclosure because they overbought. The house next door is for sale and my child when walking the dog collects the flyers from the houses for sale. We are up to ten on his regular walk. I think the reason people don't buy existing homes ins these developing neighborhoods is because of builder incentives and the ability to personalize the their own home. Our landlord spent 35K in upgrades on the interior but failed to water the yard. Woo hoo, nice cabinets but cringe when I round the curb and see the grass.

OMIGOD, I'm getting old. They have seat belts on school buses now? I didn't knew that!!!!

I hate to keep bugging you with questions, but this subject is interesting to me. Anyway, how old or new are the subdivisions in the area around you???

[Buck]

No offense, JulieM.

But why would anyone want to live so far out of town?

Especially someplace with no roads?

I don't understand why folks buy homes 30 miles from nowhere and then complain about no roads.

[JulieM]

No there are no seat belts. That's my beef.

I think the oldest houses in Woodland Springs are four years old. Ours is about 18 months old. Most of the other subdivisions are less than two years old that surround us. I don't know anything about else subdivisions much further south than Golden triangle.

[cjyoung]

Cookie cutter goes beyond style and into mass production. Every house in a broad area is at the same size and price, too. They tend to be starters or first move-ups, but either way they generally attract a uniform (homogeneous) set of buyers in terms of income and family size. Also a lot of people who are marginal on buying in. There's nothing wrong with that alone, but if anything goes wrong they can't get by. Then you get either desperation sales or foreclosures which drive down the market for everyone nearby.

Just a quick look at foreclosures by zip code (granted, a large area) using foreclosurelistings.com:

North, Outside Loop 820:
76131 (parts of N.F.W., Blue Mound, Saginaw) 33 properties in foreclosure.
76179 (far NW FW) has 38
76148 (Wautaga) has 34
76137 (North Fort Worth, Basswood area) has 68

Inside Loop 820:
76117 (Haltom City) 29
76100 (Old North Fort Worth) 126
76111 (Old Northeast FW) 18
76107 (West FW) 17
76109 (SW FW) has 4
76110 (South FW, close in) has 7
76104 (near S & SE FW) has 19
76103 (near East FW) has 16
76105 (Near SE FW) has 15

What does this prove? Well, that I get too wierd looking at data sometimes. But it also seems that those new areas have some bad stuff going on. Especially 76137. I know people who live there who can't move out because that new home has declined in value. A significant reason is nearby foreclosure sales and the effect on appraisals.

You forgot 76177 (Texas Motor Speedway and south), 76247 (west and north of Texas Motor Speedway and Northwest High School) 76248 (Keller ZIP code, but most of population and growth is in Fort Worth).

I live in the area and the housing stock in 76131, 76179, 76177, and 76248 are improving.

[Keller Pirate]

Julie, is Woodland Springs the same association that is fining a homeowner over $100,000 for his deck over the patio that he added onto his house?

For those that might not have seen the story, a homeowner applied for and received permission to put a cover/deck over his patio. When finished the deck had a door from the second story of the house and was a second story deck as well as a patio cover. The homeowners association told him to tear it down because the original plan didn't show the door. He is fighting and has run up big fines and lawyer fees.

[JulieM]

Yes that is our ridiculous HOA. The real reason it was told to be torn down was because the neighbor complained because they could see into her backyard...nevermind that it was already a two story. Here is the addy for the story http://www.ipetition...on/Accapproval/

It's unbelievable that the HOA...the developer now would pursue this. Either way the homeowners pay. Trust me when I say 99 percent of the homeowners (and us renters) are 100 percent behind the Smith's.

[Buck]

Remember when Parkwood Hill banned pickup trucks?

[Keller Pirate]

This is long but entertaining. Feel free to move it if it is not relevant to this thread.


Reject Rhetoric, Sprawl Not So Bad

Sprawl is not the worst thing that ever happened to U.S. cities. In fact, by many measures, it's been beneficial.

Despite the cliché among some academics and intellectuals that sprawl leads to unattractive and traffic-clogged cities, the reality is that sprawl has benefited many people over many years. Many Americans today, including suburbanites, are happy where they live, work and play.

So what explains the crusade against sprawl? How could a recent book on urban planning have opened with the unqualified -- and ludicrous -- assertion that "sprawl is America's most lethal disease?" How has the campaign against sprawl -- and the American car culture that goes with it -- become a political force across the country?

I would argue that worries about sprawl and traffic have developed not because our situation is so bad but because it is so good.

In good economic times, expectations run ahead of what is possible. Soaring expectations, rather than actual problems, are responsible for a good deal of our contemporary discontent.

A good example is the din of complaints about traffic in Los Angeles. From one perspective, this reaction is bizarre. Even when speeds on the freeway decline to 20 mph, drivers move more quickly than they do at the center of almost any large, older city in Europe or the United States.

The problem is not that congestion is worse in Los Angeles. It is that the highway builders of the 1950s and 1960s were so successful in building their way out of congestion that people became used to driving across the entire metropolitan area and made choices about where they lived and worked based on that reality.

When it comes to automobile travel, Los Angeles, perhaps more than almost any other large city in the world, suffers from deflation of raised expectations. The residents of Paris, New York or Tokyo never entertained the possibility that they could drive through the center of the city at 60 mph.

In recent years, it is true, L.A.'s congestion has gotten worse. But that is actually less the fault of sprawl than it is the result of misconceptions about sprawl.

Today's anti-sprawl and anti-highway consensus emerged in the 1960s, as a reaction against urban renewal and highway construction.

But rather than confine themselves to the damage that freeway construction did to urban neighborhoods, the anti-auto activists claimed that the program hurt central cities by encouraging suburban growth.

They argued that constructing new roads was useless as a way to reduce congestion because the highways themselves "induced" traffic by generating new demand.

Their most convincing proof was the observation that new highways quickly filled with automobiles. Hence, the aphorism: "You can't build your way out of congestion."

The only way to break the vicious cycle of new roads, more traffic and sprawl, the anti-auto forces claimed, was to stop building roads and create more mass transit.

This would turn the vicious cycle on its head, creating instead a virtuous cycle in which more people riding on urban mass transit would create more demand for work and housing in areas convenient to transit stops.

This is the logic that has undergirded public policy in Los Angeles and many places in the last decades. It has led to the expenditure of billions of dollars on new transit systems, such as the new light-rail lines and subway in Los Angeles.

Despite this expenditure, transit's share of trips has fallen and traffic has continued to get worse in almost every market in the country. In the Los Angeles region, for example, mass transit, which accounted for 1.94 percent of trips in 1983, dropped to 1.64 percent in 2003, according to figures compiled by transportation consultant Wendell Cox.

Why? Because so many people are locked into unrealistic assumptions about the way transit worked in the past or could work in the future.

First of all, and contrary to much popular opinion, Los Angeles' highways were not intended to hurt the central city, nor were they part of a devious plot to eliminate alternatives to cars.

Los Angeles had a terrible traffic problem in the 1920s and '30s. Many downtown business owners felt that congestion was threatening their existence at a time when investment downtown had lagged and there was fierce competition from outlying centers.

Downtown businessmen were enthusiastic about plans for a massive superhighway system to bring people downtown more efficiently. Starting in the 1940s, Los Angeles embarked on one of the most ambitious programs of highway building in American history.

This campaign was successful. Anyone who is old enough to have driven in Los Angeles in the 1960s or '70s can testify to the sense of liberation that accompanied the completion of the new roads.

Suddenly it was possible, in a matter of minutes, to make trips that had taken hours. People in Santa Monica soon thought nothing of accepting dinner invitations in Pasadena. This mobility meant greater choices in jobs, housing and recreation. This, in turn, fueled growth and prosperity in Southern California.

Unfortunately, this enhanced mobility has eroded since the 1970s, as population and density have increased without a corresponding development in the highway network. The Los Angeles region, once at the forefront of freeway development, now falls toward the bottom of the list of cities in the number of freeway lane miles per capita.

As the population has grown, as families have become affluent and as more women have entered the workforce, there has been a major increase in car ownership and driving -- and a demand for mobility.

But mobility has been impaired. The "sprawl debates" of the last few decades have pitted citizen against citizen by suggesting that the choice is between public versus private transportation and the automobile versus the railroad.

This has weakened the consensus for funding for all transportation -- public and private, highway and rail. This has hurt mobility, exacerbated traffic problems and eroded the global competitiveness of Los Angeles.

Given the success of the anti-highway lobby, it is not surprising that there has been a lack of taxpayer support for building new roads and increasing capacity on existing roads.

The fixation on sprawl has also taken attention from the scenarios that might help build effective new public transportation systems.

It is quite likely that this will involve the replacement of both the train and the gasoline-fueled automobile. Both are, after all, 19th-century means of transportation, and very inefficient ones at that.

Because cities are so dynamic, it is difficult to know whether our future urban areas will be lower or higher in density than today.

In either case, new modes of transportation that combine the adaptability and personal comfort of the auto with the efficiency of the train or bus are more likely to satisfy the needs of most Americans.

We can do it, and enhance mobility for everyone. But only if we put aside the old battles over sprawl. - Commentary, Robert Bruegmann, The Contra Costa Times (Bruegmann is a professor at the University of Illinois and author of "Sprawl: A Compact History.")

[Now in Denton]

I have news that may only make some of you more upset. But in the FWBP. They now have (fixed) the permit backlog problem. They are going to hire more staff and up the fees.

[cjyoung]

Julie, is Woodland Springs the same association that is fining a homeowner over $100,000 for his deck over the patio that he added onto his house?

For those that might not have seen the story, a homeowner applied for and received permission to put a cover/deck over his patio. When finished the deck had a door from the second story of the house and was a second story deck as well as a patio cover. The homeowners association told him to tear it down because the original plan didn't show the door. He is fighting and has run up big fines and lawyer fees.

As a former board member of a North Fort Worth HOA, I can tell you that the HOA will eventually lose in court if the plaintiffs lawyer is halfway decent.

[hooked]

I can tell you that the HOA will eventually lose in court if the plaintiffs lawyer is halfway decent.

Isn't that an oxymoron?

[Keller Pirate]

I have news that may only make some of you more upset. But in the FWBP. They now have (fixed) the permit backlog problem. They are going to hire more staff and up the fees.

That won't be good for anyone except Ross Perot.

[heathPS]

That won't be good for anyone except Ross Perot.

Why is that?

[ghughes]

It seems the Fort Worth is working to fix up the roads to accomodate growth. But given all the lags involved, collecting at the time of building permit hardly gets the pavement on the ground in time.

http://www.fortworth...nsImpactFee.htm

[vjackson]

Fox4 News did a story this morning about the school openings and unsafe taffic conditions around them. That is really dangerous. I couldn't believe there are no curbs, no sidewalks, ...nothing.

[Keller Pirate]

That won't be good for anyone except Ross Perot.

Why is that?

The North Ft Worth building boom is up against if not already into property owned by Hillwood a company owned by Perot to develop Alliance and the surrounding area. Keller School District named a school in Ft Worth after Ross Perot's sister. Coincidence? http://www.kellerisd...meetmsperot.htm

As for schools going in where the roads are not updated and no sidewalks. What do you think, should the school district pay to do the road work when they build the school. My first thought was that the city should but now I wonder if the city can't, maybe the schools should.

Would this area be better off under their own governence? Say the new city of North Ft Worth or Alliance?
Being 30 miles from no where, as someone said, local folks making decisions about the area they live in might make better choices than someone way off in downtown Ft Worth or Dallas.

Also no one responded to my question about water as a good reason to limit growth. Do cities really have the right to enforce $2,000 fines for watering your lawn in the day while they are issuing permits for more homes. You would think if the city OK'd a permit for your home you would have full utility of your property. Building more homes and restricting water doesn't seem to go hand in hand. Maybe it is a Midwest thing.

I lived in Southern California for 40 years. All water conservation was voluntary, I never in all those years lived in a place where water restrictions were enforced or fines levied. Of course, water was considered when permits for buildings were issued and developers went to planning commisions with their hat in their hand prepared to jump through hoops to get a project approved.

[Buck]

Ross Perot has brought billions in economic development, jobs and success to Fort Worth.

I don't always agree with his company's business decisions, but I don't think they should be portrayed as bad.

The development has been accomplished with Fort Worth's investment, and Fort Worth should reap the success. The idea of having a separate government would rob Fort Worth.

The area could make a legititimate argument for its own council district, similar to Clyde Picht's district for southwest Fort Worth.

As far as schools -- the school district is local and a locally elected board chose where to put schools. One problem is that the city of Keller dominates school elections because of poor voter turnout on the Fort Worth side. Fort Worth residents deserve more seats on that school board.

And nobody forced anyone to live "30 miles from nowhere."

As far as water limiting growth -- that would be cart-before-the-horse. Growth brings success, economic development and a vibrant community. We must have the water to promote growth, even if that means we must be more careful with our resources.

[FoUTASportscaster]

Arlington has a budget shortfall because taxes have always been too low and the leaders won't raise taxes to pay for decent services.

Businesses depend on growth and more customers. I agree with planning carefully, but I do not agree with reducing growth.

They haven't lowered taxes, and since growth has slowed, they are in a shortfall. That model that is successful in the burbs depends heavily and isn't sustainable. A 17 million shortfall is huge and wouldn't be closed without a moderate tax increase.

Let's not confuse reducing growth with sustainable development. Sustainable development should be the goal. Unless we are talking million dollar homes in Highland park of Southlake, this type of development leads to trouble later.

[Buck]

"Sustainable development" sounds a lot like "no affordable housing."

[JulieM]

About 15 Fort Worth residents with children attending the Keller ISD schools located at Keller Hicks and Alta Vista attended the meeting Monday evening. Several spoke (including me) about having the area around the school designated a hazardous area as set forth by the TEA. That criteria includes, no sidewalks, no crosswalks, no lighted signal, 40mph speed limit and heavy industrial. Despite meeting all that criteria for free busing, the board voted it down much to the consternation of the superintendent and admin who brought forth the proposal. They later voted to provide us with busing that we must pay for. State funds would have been provided, but they preferred not to designate the area a hazardous area.

Fort Worth has promised...roflmao...by the end of the semester a stoplight and sidewalk on Alta Vista and by the start of the next school year a two block section of Keller Vista to be five lanes wide. I'm not exactly holding my breath. No school zone designation, no crosswalks...nothing. This means that the kids that can get to Alta Vista, but will have no crosswalk to get to cross Keller Hicks to go to no sidewalk to still get to the school. Amazing.

[ghughes]

For those interested in collective effort, the North Fort Worth Alliance is new but building strength. Below is an email I rec'd yesterday:

Hi All,

Well, it has been a busy summer. The Alliance is in full swing trying to promote smart growth around our communities. Our next meeting will be on August 12th at 9am at the Snooty Pig (I35 and Westport Pkwy). We have a lot of information to pass on about infrastructure, zoning and schools. We are now registered with the City of Fort Worth and have bylaws. Your attendance is very important as we will be electing members to the Executive Board in September. I will send out the agenda within the next week or so.

Thanks,
Lara Lee

[FoUTASportscaster]

"Sustainable development" sounds a lot like "no affordable housing."

Not really. It means what is there pays for itself. Prior to the automobile, every city developed sustainablely. Not sure about Fort Worth, but DTD has some affordable housing within the downtown loop.

[JulieM]

Our pal Sal Espina finally got the KISD on board to work together to get this done. He put together a proposal for FW and our developer to fund the busing until the sidewalks, a stoplight and crosswalks are built. This will benefit everybody within a two mile radius, not just Woodland Springs as has been reported and blogged at the Startlegram.

We have joined the NFWA and are working very hard with them. Next up is this new impact fee monetary increase and also an increase in the effected area. We really hope this passes.

[Keller Pirate]

I went to the KISD board meeting last night and spoke against the new bond proposal going before the voters in November. I told them this would be the first education proposal I have ever voted against in my life. My main objection was building infrastructure for the city of Ft Worth. I told them that as far as I was concerned any KISD citizens living in Keller would be a fool to vote to raise their taxes to build roads for the city of Ft Worth. I mentioned that Ft Worth will cut a sweetheart deal with any medium to large sized company to give away tax revenues and then they have the balls to soak the school district for every penny they can get out of them. I told them KISD was a medium to large sized company and should be getting deals too.

Fearing a voter backlash the board voted to include 2 of the 3 citizens committe bond proposals in the election leaving out the $17.5 million new stadium proposal. Prop 1 includes $132.5 to build 3 schools and add on to Trinity Springs Middle school. The $88 million to build a fourth high school is the item I object to the most. This is way too much to build a school in a slowing housing market. Builders are going to be sitting around looking for something to do in a couple of years. It turns out a lot of money is going to the city of Ft Worth in fees.

I did some research on impact fees and found out that many states require developers to contribute land and/or cash for schools. I especially liked Loudoun County, Virginia's plan. They charge a developer $29,750 for single-familiy detached dwellings, $15,619 for single-familiy attached and $7809 for multifamily units for school facilities. They want to change that because they can't keep up even with those fees. Their school board said, "The game has been loaded in favor of developers." It looks like we need these fees now and it's a good way to slow sprawl in Ft Worth.

Julie, if your group has a website or email address I would like to get in touch with them.

Did you read the story about the 7 year old struck by a car in front of Freedom Elementary School? 21 minute response time for a child down in the street. I hope you folks think you're getting your money's worth on the sky high taxes from your fine city.

[Buck]

KellerPirate, I don't think there was any road money in the bond issue.

The city of Keller is a small and insignificant part of the greater school district.

It is wrong to divide Keller vs. FW, and such rhetoric will only ultimately hurt residents of the city of Keller.

[Keller Pirate]

Buck, the problem is not with the citizens of Ft Worth but with the elected leaders and city staff.

Greg Hughes has defended city staff on this forum vs elected leadership. I am here to tell him, based on the information I was given after the meeting that city staff is a big problem in Ft Worth. They apparantly feel insulated enough that they don't care what the elected leaders or the city manager say, they are going to do things their way.

If I lived in Ft Worth I would be at the city council meeting demanding the resignation of the city manager. He accepted responsibility for the finance dept mess and he has other things to answer for as well. Maybe city staff is unmanageable but they will remain so unless heads start to roll. As a matter of fact I was encouraged to speak about this issue in front of the Ft Worth council.

I can't go into detail here but school district officials said they have met with Ft Worth leadership including the city manager and have been promised cooperation and when it comes to dealing with city staff nothing changes.

Ft Worth's word and handshake are worthless.

By the way, how do you feel about a 21 minute response time for a child down in the street?
If Ft Worth can't afford to build streets they at least ought to be able to provide fire and police for 88 cents per hundred tax rate. How about impact fees?

Who is getting hurt? Keller residents are infinetly better off than Ft Worth residents.

[Buck]

If you were told all this at the Keller school board meeting, they always want to blame their own mistakes on Fort Worth.

There is no reason for Fort Worth to cooperate with KISD, particularly not when leaders take a Keller-first attitude.

KISD is hostile to Fort Worth children. How many Fort Worth residents are on the school board? 1? 2? When 3/4ths of the district is in Fort Worth?

We need single-member districts out there so Fort Worth's parents and needs can be fairly represented.