Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

So where is Fort Worth's urban growth?


  • Please log in to reply
132 replies to this topic

#101 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,647 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 12 January 2017 - 04:46 PM

I'm embarrased Fort Worth's nice downtown was compared with Oklahoma City's lackluster downtown.

OKC could catch up quick though. The "core to shore" park and surrounding developments are mighty impressive, Bricktown is neat (but a bit tourist-trappy), they've added an impressive skyscraper, Moody Gardens has been well kept, the downtown pedestrian network is growing stronger, and they are working on a streetcar. Fort Worth would be smart to follow some of OKC's paths. 



#102 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,647 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 11 December 2017 - 02:17 PM

Check this out

 

 

Interesting chart of the day. Between 2010 - 2016, the population of Dallas grew by 100k and the population of Fort Worth grew by 90k. During these six years, Dallas actually saw a decrease in single-family housing as the city put up more multi-family and became denser.

 

DQx42h4UQAEanDY.jpgDQx43YvVAAIQi0z.jpg

Via Sean Buckley



#103 Dylan

Dylan

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 11 December 2017 - 07:06 PM

Dallas proper has added more individual residents than Fort Worth proper in the past 7 years? That's news to me.


-Dylan


#104 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,647 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 11 December 2017 - 07:21 PM

Census says so

City_________2010________2016______Change

 

Dallas______1,200,711____1,317,929___117,218

Fort Worth __748,719______854,113____105,394



#105 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,647 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 29 December 2018 - 06:10 PM

Here is a comparison of skyscraper construction (250ft minimum) with some peer cities.

 

wGUGxt2.png

Among these cities, Fort Worth is 2nd to last in new construction, behind Memphis, having only built 3 buildings over 250 feet in the last 30 years (Pier 1, 2004, Omni, 2009, Frost, 2018) and nothing currently under construction of that size.

 

in 1980, Austin was dead last, only having 5 buildings over 250 ft. By 2020, they are on pace to be #1 with over 40. The change Austin has seen since 2000 is unprecedented. 

 

Nashville and Charlotte are also currently booming, both with high upwards trends in recent years.



#106 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 29 December 2018 - 08:39 PM

A couple of things about the graph:  Austin and Fort Worth are no longer pier cities; and being second to last is further evidence that something is "rotten" in Fort Worth.



#107 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 30 December 2018 - 08:51 AM

At least we can see in this data that a "hockey stick" is possible (Austin and Nashville).  It would be great to understand the leading indicators in those cities and see what Fort Worth looks like relative to those.  Maybe we are just at a different place the the evolution of our city.

 

Or maybe those hockey sticks are "bubbles" that we don't really want anyway.  It would be interesting to know what mistakes those cities are have made / are making and if you think that the problem with Fort Worth is that we're too risk averse and don't want to be open enough for some "necessary" mistakes to find our way.

 

For sure, I too am disappointed that Fort Worth can't find and project an identity that encourages investment and relocations.



#108 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 30 December 2018 - 02:48 PM

..... (1) Maybe we are just at a different place the the evolution of our city

 

......(2) Or maybe those hockey sticks are "bubbles" that we don't really want anyway.  

 

.... (3)  [if]  the problem with Fort Worth is that we're too risk averse and don't want to be open enough for some "necessary" mistakes to find our way.

 

For sure, I too am disappointed that Fort Worth can't find and project an identity that encourages investment and relocations.

 

   1. Yes, Fort Worth is in the Post Amon G. Carter (AGC) phase.  Instead of our leadership fighting tooth and nail for Fort Worth first per AGC, today's approach has been to buy into the theory that the "whole is more important than the parts" with the expectation of a payback of approximately equal returns.  These statistics reveal that the current theory is failing Fort Worth.  Furthermore, an independent $500k study commissioned by the City of Fort Worth found that Fort Worth was on the road to becoming more like a bedroom community than being a primary city. So, yes Fort Worth is in a different place historically that risks it being permanently positioned as a fourth tier city.

 

2. There are indications that there is a truism to the idea "that we don't really want [growth] anyway". A better way to think of it is that the only growth that is wanted is the growth owned by a set of hometown power group; and for which tighter control over the City can be maintained.  Take Mexico for example:

 

It is theorized that Mexico's elite is happy to export its labor to the USA; workers are happy to have jobs to support their family and the Mexican Government does not have to deal with policies that will provide jobs for its people. The result is that Mexico is relatively stable and the Mexican Elite maintains its control over the country.

 

When you boil it down, isn't the roles of Dallas and Fort Worth comparable.  Dallas has the jobs and Fort Worth is relieved of the pressure to provide a sufficient amount of employment for its residents.  Fort Worth is stable and its power elite maintains control, sets the agenda of what it wants, and continues to prosper. Everyone is happy.

 

3. In a correctly functioning economy, there is no such thing as a collective aversion by a City to risk taking, only the opportunity to succeed or to fail. 

 

As I have come to believe over time, the Fort Worth economy is being politically engineered to benefit the hometown group and is seen as a deterrent to non-hometown groups aspiring to invest in Fort Worth; sometimes its is subtle as in the handling of Left Bank; and other times it is not, as in the way that City Place v. Sundance Square was to eventually end with regards to WeWork. I had nothing but my feelings that something was not right about the lack of unfettered growth in Fort Worth, but graphs and charts seem to confirm what I was sensing.

 

It is not that Fort Worth would not be open enough to investment, it is that Fort Worth is a big town under the control of an entrenched lordship having to protect its interest.  In a way, Fort Worth is not unlike the small East Central Texas town of my parents where nothing happens unless it has the approval of the ruling family of many generations.

 

Fort Worth is in the 2nd largest economy within the U.S.; it possesses much if not all of the same fundamental assets of its Texas pier cities; and yet its growth and development has not only fallen behind Dallas, Houston and Austin, it has fallen behind in a spectacular ways such as in higher paying jobs or as in attracting younger, educated populations to the City.

 

I see a remedy and hope that Fort Worth will do some basic things such as infrastructure to make it more of a player in the Texas economy.  Infrastructure should include a streetcar system that will stimulate growth further to the north and to the south of Downtown; infrastructure should include the restarting of commercial air service at Meacham Airport to inject enough of the regional air commerce into the core of Fort Worth and that would stimulate economic growth in Downtown and its immediate surrounding sectors. 

 

Another ray of hope is witnessing new entrants into Fort Worth that are challenging the status quo.

 

There are plenty of other things needed for Fort Worth to rev up its local economy, to encourage investments and relocations, but implementing a major infrastructure is one way to end the hibernation that Fort Worth has been in since the opening of DFW Airport..



#109 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 30 December 2018 - 04:05 PM

I think the city has been fortunate that some people stepped up and invested in it when maybe other's wouldn't.  Perhaps that caused a concentration or close to a monolithic situation, but I don't know that I think there is some sinister plot to keep new people away.  But rather more that you have a big player here and it is hard for start-ups to come in with a story strong enough to compete incrementally.  Look at the car industry: it took a car company with crazy innovative ideas, lead by a really bold person to convince the sector that the incumbents weren't better situated to actually produce -- and I'm not even certain that we know how the whole story will play out yet.

 

That's unfortunate in that we all expect we need to have some kind of organic experimentation for well-rounded growth, but they are intimidated (in both directions: intimidated to enter with a large incumbent, and perhaps suffer from intimidation from that incumbent) to be here.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that there is a powerful incumbent / competitor here, who might sometimes seem to rest on their laurels (although I don't really know it is my place to have expectations from people who already do so much), and we need to attract equally powerful other players to participate with their own visions.  We can't treat it like it is a place full of start-ups all on equal footing in some greenfield.  We have participants with proven track records who have poured resources into the city -- of course the city will listen to them.

 

I'm not certain how to fix it, but I do hope somehow we begin to look like a place that can draw major developers that have a vision that is as good or better than anything we currently have, and are are willing to pour in as much or more capital to it, and then I think then it will be hard for any sense of protectionism to win out (and again, I don't really see it as protectionism as much as I see it as people who have invested heavily in a vision for the city who will put up static any time they think others are not trying for the same quality of product).

 

The glossy pictures of the Left Bank development and what we are getting -- that's a bit of a let down.  There is some philosophical question here: is it better to build something rather than nothing; how long do you wait for something from someone who wants to do the right thing?

 

The We Work situation definitely has bad optics, and it would be interesting to know the story more deeply.

 

(edited only for proof reading some simple word and spell corrections -- I was in a hurry earlier)



#110 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 30 December 2018 - 06:13 PM

Oh boy, I think your analysis in whole is well founded.

 

It is hard to be too critical of the "one-man" investment that has been made in Downtown. It is also hard not to realize that such control has come with a cost. I find myself caught between a rock and a hard place.

 

To give credit, Fort Worth has one of the best Downtown of any city its size for being a place where having sense of ones comfort and well being is measured. As fellow forum member Ramjet details, at 300ft above the street, Austin, Texas is quite impressive; and yet at the street level, Austin is plagued with many problems just like Seattle and San Francisco.

 

I have become increasingly encouraged by the influx of out of town investment into Downtown.  Such influx represents to me that the high level of quality that Fort Worth enjoys is paving the way for others to come in with their own projects and that the credit is largely due to the investment of that "one-man" effort.  If it appears that I am conflicted, yes I am.  When does a lordship hamper the free market?

 

Countless words have been written by me in an attempt to understand what I view as being an abnormally stunted growth trajectory where Fort Worth is compared to just the major cities within Texas. Over 30-35 years, Downtown occupancy rates have been healthy, yet there has been nothing reasonable to challenge the full capacity and everything done to maintain the occupancy for existing buildings. To encourage relocations and higher paying jobs, there should be something on the horizon at all times that will satisfy the need of a corporation looking for space in one of the nicest downtown areas in the state or in the country.

 

One way to begin to look like a place that can draw relocations is to return to seeing what is in the best interest of Fort Worth over what is in the best interest of the region.  When Fort Worth's interest is prioritized, then the region will benefit too.

 

A city that was once a major city then fell upon hard times and now is rising again is Detroit even though it is sandwiched between Chicago to the west and Toronto to the east.  Detroit has less inhabitants than Fort Worth.  Detroit is implementing incentives to bring developers to its downtown, which has had the added benefits of seeing non-incentivized developers returning to it also.

 

Fort Worth aspires to be fiscally conservative, but also is rather liberal with incentives to far reaching developments miles from the Downtown Core.  If for example, Fort Worth was to issue a RFP with incentives to a major office developer company, then it might be enough for a developer to come to an evaluation that the Fort Worth:Dallas Equation is fairly comparable when it comes to the needs of a corporation - low taxes, highways, airport, weather, location, etc.  It might just be what makes Fort Worth look like a place that wishes to draw a major developer to the City.



#111 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,647 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 30 June 2021 - 10:46 PM

Here is another way of looking at it, 

 

74% of all new residential permits in 2020 were single family homes (the rest in multifamily). In Arlington, it's 50/50, San Antonio, 46% were SFH. In Dallas, 40%, Houston 36%, Austin just 23%. In Seattle, the only city to grow faster than Fort Worth, 96% of all new units were in multifamily buildings. While Multifamily homes can be urban or suburban in nature, single family homes are nearly always suburban. You could guesstimate that over 3/4 of Fort Worth's growth is happening in the far flung edges of development.

Source: https://socds.huduser.gov/permits/index.html? 

An aside, Austin is building a TON of housing. Fort Worth is the 3rd highest I've found, having permitted 9,659 units, which trails Phoenix (11,647) and Austin's whooping 17,690!

I've also talked elsewhere about Tarrant County slowing in growth, despite Fort Worth's explosive pace. Here are all the Tarrant County citiies with at least 250 permitted n

Fort Worth = 9,569
Arlington = 1,447
Mansfield = 845
Grapevine = 322
NRH = 309
Benbrook = 209
Crowley = 207
Haslet = 148
Haltom City = 123
Hurst = 109

About 70% of all permitted units in the county were in Fort Worth.



#112 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,287 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 01 July 2021 - 07:48 AM

I'm surprised Benbrook hasn't experienced greater residential growth, being situated between 377 and the Chisholm Trail Parkway.



#113 txbornviking

txbornviking

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,368 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 01 July 2021 - 09:25 AM

and therein we see how, over the past 20yrs our property tax burden has disproportionally shifted to residential properties:

 

Fort Worth property tax burden:

2001: 55% commercial vs 45% residential

2011: 45% commercial vs 55% residential

2021: 35% commercial vs 65% residential

 

( i have a chart from the Performance and Budget Department at the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts but haven't been able to insert it here)



#114 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 01 July 2021 - 04:45 PM

Do you have a scenario where the commercial sector's burden will shift in the other direction?



#115 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,287 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 02 July 2021 - 08:32 AM

Fort Worth has tried over the years to be pro-business.  The lessening property tax burden is probably one indicator of that, and I don't see any shift the other way in the future.  



#116 eastfwther

eastfwther

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 383 posts

Posted 02 July 2021 - 12:05 PM

and therein we see how, over the past 20yrs our property tax burden has disproportionally shifted to residential properties:

 

Fort Worth property tax burden:

2001: 55% commercial vs 45% residential

2011: 45% commercial vs 55% residential

2021: 35% commercial vs 65% residential

 

( i have a chart from the Performance and Budget Department at the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts but haven't been able to insert it here)

Wow...this isn't good at all. 



#117 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,420 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 02 July 2021 - 02:15 PM

Fort Worth has tried over the years to be pro-business.  The lessening property tax burden is probably one indicator of that, and I don't see any shift the other way in the future.  

 

I tend to think it's a symptom of an overabundance of single family home growth rather than lowering the tax burden of businesses.  I'm not saying that tax breaks in the name of attracting business haven't contributed to the shift, but the city would still be in this same boat without them.



#118 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 02 July 2021 - 02:24 PM

I think Fort Worth is pro-business. The question is what is being used to define pro-business?  Is it the preference for one sector of business over another sector?



#119 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 03 July 2021 - 07:21 AM

I think Fort Worth is pro-business. The question is what is being used to define pro-business?  Is it the preference for one sector of business over another sector?

 

I'd like to understand in what way are you thinking that Fort Worth is pro-business?

 

As the evidence shows, our tax base is progressively more and more unbalanced (reversed actually) toward residential, so if we are pro-business, we must be at least 2x more pro-residential.



#120 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,861 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:Biking, Photography, Music, Bass Guitar, Architecture, Construction

Posted 03 July 2021 - 10:38 AM

 

I think Fort Worth is pro-business. The question is what is being used to define pro-business?  Is it the preference for one sector of business over another sector?

 

I'd like to understand in what way are you thinking that Fort Worth is pro-business?

 

As the evidence shows, our tax base is progressively more and more unbalanced (reversed actually) toward residential, so if we are pro-business, we must be at least 2x more pro-residential.

 

 

I think the two go hand-in-hand...residential growth and business growth.  A lot of financial institutions chose to relocate to the wealthiest parts of DFW because the schools and housing were top notch.  That's great but their employees are going to require top dollar in order to survive and that will impact their cost of doing business.  I think there's plenty of other types of businesses that want to give their employees a fighting chance at having a normal cost of living and Fort Worth is a great option for doing that.  I think people are getting tired of driving 60 minutes to work and back just to have a normal cost of living.

 

According to this survey, Fort Worth is ranked #9 as the best large cities in America to start a business.  Scoring includes a} Business Environment b} Access to Resources and c} Business Cost.

 

https://wallethub.co...a-business/2281

 

It's sort of funny though to your point, FW scored only 4 points for Business Environment.


  • JBB likes this

#121 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 03 July 2021 - 01:33 PM

 

It's sort of funny though to your point, FW scored only 4 points for Business Environment.

 

 

It is not the best data science article, or super clear, but I think that the "4" is a rank in that dimension, and is therefore a good thing.  But if you look at the methodology for that factor, it is really over-weighted to transient COVID related factors.

 

The other thing that make me scratch my head is that for the Business Costs ranks, Dallas is 70 and Fort Worth is 71, but they say that is factor is made up from Office-Space Affordability, Labor Costs (double weight), Corporate Taxes, and Cost of Living -- knowing even the limited amount that I know about those factors, it is not reasonable to me that with that large list of cites Dallas and Fort Worth are next to each other in rank.

 

I personally think that Fort Worth fancies itself as a place to live and just hopes there is a job within a reasonable commute.  There is a lot of chicken-egg that goes on with that, and so I don't mean to over simplify it.  It might be an interesting exercise to see the comparative number of square feet of residential and square feet of non-warehouse office space in the different North Texas areas to see where we relatively stand.  I don't mean to imply there is a proper relationship between the two very different dimensions of residential square foot and office square foot, but their meanings should have some comparative meaning in the North Texas region.


  • JBB likes this

#122 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 03 July 2021 - 02:30 PM

Fort Worth is pro-business.  The tax burden ratio demonstrates a favorable environment for business.  Texas is largely a property and a sales tax state with a few other taxes thrown in.  Fort Worth, like every city in Texas must rely on these two taxes plus other ways to squeeze money out of its residents. Texas taxes are regressive.

 

So, if you want displaced the blue collar waged jobs with the higher wage jobs, then be progressive as I am: call for a State Personal Income Tax and redistribute the money towards public education in the Texas' big cities.  Then sure, with a SPIT in place you can bring on all the white collar jobs in your dreams.

 

The issue that some are having is the businesses that are providing jobs in Fort Worth aren't their flavor of business.



#123 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 03 July 2021 - 06:27 PM

The tax burden ratio is not evidence is not about the the tax rates, but about the tax totals, it is out of balance not because of some pro-business favorable rate, it is out of balance from a lack of commercial property to tax.

 

It is interesting that you bring up types of taxes, because the hotel side of hospitality is taxed in an interesting way, and the revenue is earmarked differently than say, sales taxes.  Also the average salary of a hospitality job in Fort Worth is $21,558 according to Zip Recruiter.  Glass Door says $27k if we are talking all of DFW.

 

So yes, I want higher wage jobs and I want nice high-value commercial space or other commercial assets to pay more property tax both too make the proportions of residential vs. commercial taxation is healthier, but also to make the pie bigger for our city so we can afford to pay for all of the good works that need to be done.

 

Although I personally am not opposed to alternate ways of taxing, we have to remember that the lack of a state sales tax is in fact one of the reasons our state gets business relocations.



#124 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 03 July 2021 - 09:47 PM

Once again, there is a need to explain the concept of commercial activity.

 

Investopedia.com - Commercial refers to activities of commerce—business operations to earn profits.

Otherwise, the activity would be public, charity, religious, etc., i.e. non-profit.

 

If you can identify a company that has relocated to FW for a non-profit purpose, I would like to know it. 

 

When a  production company sets up shop in FW, it is for profit.   To produce, it also provides employment for many of FW residents who skill sets match the qualifications of that company hiring needs.  Company do their due diligence and will know the labor force before they commit to FW.  One of the positive things to come out of the pandemic is that companies have realized that wages must rise, particularly in the production chain to keep companies sufficiently staffed.

 

Wages!  Wages are not confined to an exclusive jurisdiction. Wages earned in FW would not necessarily be pinned to FW; in fact, higher wages tend to go to surrounding communities. For instance, a huge swath of wages earned in both FW and Dallas flows out of their jurisdiction and turns up as household income in adjacent counties where schools are better funded and communities are then able to have better amenities.

 

U.S. Labor Department data is indicating that workers enthusiasm and the demand for workers are each readjusting to the new normal. Yet, the enthusiasm for tourism and the support structure is having a rebirth. At least in the tourism sector, the flow of money is positive. The workers in tourism and hospitality are more likely to be a resident of the central city; more likely to use public transit, and more likely to shop locally; all which would be pinned to FW.  Just my perspective.

 

I have recently come to the conclusion from the archive of your consistent calls for better things for the general public is that what you unknowingly want is a State Personal Income Tax.  Right on!  I think Elon Musk should be taxed until the cows come in.  Who deserves to be worth nearly a trillion dollars! You seem to agree with me in favoring a SPIT instead of the sham lottery, casino, horse racing, and all the other regressive tax schemes offered by the Legislature. I'm glad to have you joined me as a member of the Progressive World.

 

A SPIT is what Texas should implement if as you assert -"to make the pie bigger for our city so we can afford to pay for all of the good works that need to be done".

  

I just don't think under valuing the efficacy of production and tourism employment as legitimate commercial activities makes economic sense in reality.



#125 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 04 July 2021 - 03:33 PM

This tells the story - Is Fort Worth just lucky or is it smart to go after tourism, manufacturing and hospitality?

 

Fort Worth Business Press -https://fortworthbus...ends-its-gains/



#126 Dylan

Dylan

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 05 July 2021 - 12:39 PM

If Fort Worth attempted to attract office developers as it does warehouse and hotel developers, maybe we'd have more office buildings... and fewer people would have to commute to Dallas.


-Dylan


#127 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,647 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 05 July 2021 - 01:12 PM

A good thought from Jonathan Morris,
 

"How and why people work is evolving. Corporate relocation talk will be a thing of the past, replaced by smart cities focusing on attracting lifestyle relocation. When people can work where they want, where will they live?"

https://twitter.com/...2897872906?s=21



#128 Dylan

Dylan

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 05 July 2021 - 01:24 PM

Thank goodness I have a job that I attend in-person, and graduated college before remote learning.

 

When I was in school, I did all my homework in the library. There are too many distractions at home, and I was never motivated to do homework at home. And, if I didn't have to face each of my teachers in-person twice a week, there are probably many assignments I wouldn't have done.

 

Since the pandemic and remote learning, school grades and test scores have plummeted. I'd imaging work productivity has plummeted as well.

 

There are many people like myself who need to be motivated to do things in-person, face to face.

 

EDIT: I refuse to accept that work-from-home will be the new normal.


-Dylan


#129 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 05 July 2021 - 03:13 PM

A good thought from Jonathan Morris,

How and why people work is evolving. Corporate relocation talk will be a thing of the past, replaced by smart cities focusing on attracting lifestyle relocation. When people can work where they want, where will they live?

 

 

  Fort Worth in a nutshell.



#130 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,492 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 05 July 2021 - 08:00 PM

Thank goodness I have a job that I attend in-person, and graduated college before remote learning.

 

When I was in school, I did all my homework in the library. There are too many distractions at home, and I was never motivated to do homework at home. And, if I didn't have to face each of my teachers in-person twice a week, there are probably many assignments I wouldn't have done.

 

Since the pandemic and remote learning, school grades and test scores have plummeted. I'd imaging work productivity has plummeted as well.

 

There are many people like myself who need to be motivated to do things in-person, face to face.

 

EDIT: I refuse to accept that work-from-home will be the new normal.

Actually according to most initial reports, especially now a year into it, work production has actually increased in several industries.  Mainly it's because people have gained personal time back because they do not have to commute.  Unfortunately the is no such thing as normal anymore...  things will not go back to what they were before the pandemic so whether we want it or not we are definitely experiencing a new normal.



#131 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,647 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 05 July 2021 - 08:50 PM

EDIT: I refuse to accept that work-from-home will be the new normal.

Yeh I think office work is returning for a lot of people, but still I'd expect at least double digit percentages of jobs will simply never go back. 

Making your city desirable is of course always going to be a goal, so it will be interesting to see how places can position themselves to do so. Fort Worth has absolutely no trouble getting residents to move here, so it seems things are going good. But it'd be nice to see the continued improvement of what the past decade or so has brought. 

Perhaps even more important than being desirable in the "new normal": being affordable. 



#132 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,861 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:Biking, Photography, Music, Bass Guitar, Architecture, Construction

Posted 07 February 2022 - 10:23 PM

I thought someone already posted this article, but if not, here it is:

DFW posted nearly $30 billion in multifamily investment in 2021, leading the Nation

https://www.star-tel...e258142023.html

#133 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 08 February 2022 - 08:45 AM

As I think we have talked about in other threads on this forum, I don't really like all of the cash going into rentals, because it does not increase the housing inventory (which is what we need to cool down home prices).  And even worse, it invites more renters to live in the area that may some day want a home, which will increase demand and fire up home prices even more. And even worse than that is what it does for the population distribution -- I'm sure most of this rental development is in the core cites, and then if people want a home and there is no home inventory in the core cities, they end up moving to the peripheral cities were homes are more affordable.  And they take their upwardly mobile tax base with them and out of the core cities, reducing support for core city schools and infrastructure.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users