TCC coming to Downtown
#1101
Posted 28 June 2010 - 06:43 AM
#1102
Posted 28 June 2010 - 07:58 AM
"A doctor can bury his mistakes, but an architect can only advise his client to plant vines." - Frank Lloyd Wright
--
Kara B.
#1103
Posted 28 June 2010 - 10:49 AM
"Keep Fort Worth folksy"
#1104
Posted 29 June 2010 - 07:25 AM
So, is the general view here that the project isn't up to Fort Worth's lofty architectural standards? I can't really tell for certain from the highly repetitive beating of the rotting remains of a horse long dead.
If only they were as wise and enlightened as we are.
#1105
Posted 07 July 2010 - 05:43 PM
#1106
Posted 07 July 2010 - 06:33 PM
I'll make sure to get approval from you next time.
--
Kara B.
#1107 Trust Them: Not!
Posted 07 July 2010 - 06:58 PM
Rebels in the Palace
Change is on the agenda for the Tarrant County College board.
http://www.fwweekly....c...&Itemid=375
#1108
Posted 07 July 2010 - 07:05 PM
Rebels in the Palace
Change is on the agenda for the Tarrant County College board.
http://www.fwweekly....c...&Itemid=375
Interesting read.
Better Business Bureau: A place to find or post valid complaints for auto delerships and maintenance facilities. (New Features) If you have a valid gripe about auto dealerships, this is the place to voice it.
#1109
Posted 08 July 2010 - 05:21 AM
But the horse isn't dead. The issue hasn't been resolved. The building isn't finished and we're not through paying for it.
Beyond that, the depth of mismanagement and failure of fiduciary responsibility on this project has been staggering and no one has really been held accountable. This hasn't been a matter of delivering a project a wee bit late and a teensie over budget. This has been a long series of egregiously poor decisions. These decisions were not made by "the school" or "the administration" or "the trustees"; they were made by individuals who so far have not been held accountable for their inexcusable failures in judgement. This project could be used as a case study of pretty much every way a public project can be mismanaged by an unchecked bureaucracy - a bureaucracy given carte blanche by the trustees, leaving it unfettered by the inconvenience of public input. $1,500/square foot! And that for easily one of the least attractive and arguably one of the least functional buildings ever built in the free world.
As long as I'm still paying for this hulking eyesore , I'll continue to give my opinion of it: it's uglier 'n homemade sin, and it cost way too much money. Why bother at this point? Public awareness. Elections. Keep up the pressure for action. It's just another complimentary service I provide.
Thanks, Andy. Good article.
#1110
Posted 08 July 2010 - 08:05 AM
#1111
Posted 08 July 2010 - 08:33 AM
Actually, I thought we had through their years of over taxation.
#1112
Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:39 AM
IF ALL facilites were in full repair.. then the monies budgeted and already collected from public TC annual property taxation were considered excessive and should be returned directly to the property owners in the form of rebate checks.. or a significant property evaluation or assessed tax reduction.
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#1113 Trust Them: Not!
Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:20 AM
IF ALL facilites were in full repair.. then the monies budgeted and already collected from public TC annual property taxation were considered excessive and should be returned directly to the property owners in the form of rebate checks.. or a significant property evaluation or assessed tax reduction.
The crux of the situation is that the strategy involves the budget category for M & O funding (Maintenance and Operations) with the term OPERATIONS liberally construed; and we are still screwed by the past actions of the board. I do believe that things will change.
#1114
Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:25 AM
Something positive: I'm encouraged by what I've read in the article Andy mentioned and to which Trust Them Not! provided a link.
That's the way i understand it, too, JBB - but whether we're paying for it with our money from our own bank accounts or with our money from the district's bank account, we're still paying for it. Of course, it's actually a little worse for us if it's from taxes long ago paid; we've been deprived of the interest on and use of the funds in the mean time.
#1115
Posted 08 July 2010 - 04:23 PM
#1116
Posted 12 July 2010 - 07:43 AM
I'll make sure to get approval from you next time.
And, based on the contents of this thread, I'll bet there will definitely be a "next time" related to TCC's design pretty soon. Death, taxes, and repetitive complaints about TCC. Things you can always count on. Apparently forever.
#1117
Posted 14 July 2010 - 09:08 AM
#1118
Posted 14 July 2010 - 09:10 AM
Do what to City Council?
#1119
Posted 14 July 2010 - 08:24 PM
#1120
Posted 15 July 2010 - 08:28 AM
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#1121
Posted 15 July 2010 - 08:37 AM
Sorry. My bad. I had my exposure compensation still on "brighten it up a bit" from my few pics of dark NY streets in the rain on Tuesday. The light colored building was then blown out in the bright sunlight so i grabbed my Photoshop® darken wand and ran it over the building a few times. Gave the building a muddy look. Before I did that, the building looked like nuclear fusion had set in...
BTW I took a shot this morning I have not yet posted where they continue the dismantling of the crane.
#1122
Posted 15 July 2010 - 09:29 AM
#1123
Posted 15 July 2010 - 09:18 PM
#1124
Posted 16 July 2010 - 07:49 AM
Appears that the TCC is back to being just a gray box structure with 1 aqua green window. Also appears that there now is a below grade gray concrete box in the hole east of the buildings. Maybe this box is an expensive 1 car underground parking structure with windows at grade level?
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#1125
Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:24 AM
#1126
Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:47 AM
#1127 Trust Them: Not!
Posted 11 August 2010 - 08:01 PM
#1128
Posted 12 August 2010 - 09:31 AM
In a slightly different but still on topic event, in todays Fort Worth Star Telegram, Page 9A 'Letters' 'Shifting Funds' an Arlighton writer talks about the TCC president to propose using construction funds for the operating budget. ""TCC looks at a bigger budget new year August 5"" and "These monies should be used for reducing the debt burden or returned to the tax payer.. not for operating funds. He continues with the tax rate for TCC is the highest in the state and needs to be brought in line with others.
Are we missing something here in the forum. I thought the budget line item was called "?" and the O&M money was in the past construded to mean to include 'capital expenditure'.. or building new construction [new downtown TCC]. Maybe they need to redifine that account definition to exclude 'new construction'.
[edit 6:53pm 12 Aug 2010]
From Fort Worth Star-Telegram Wednesday August 4, 2010 by DianeSmithatStar-telegram.com
<Quote> Even with a 4.5 percent decrease in taxable value countywide, TCC still expects to have $103 million in tax revenue to meet the budget, she said. It also plans to reallocate $28 million from the construction budget to the operations budget, Hadley said. </Quote>
Read more: http://www.star-tele...l#ixzz0wRGzUGxD
And I thought budget line items had accounting definitions... and that co-mingling of funds was an accounting violation.
I kind of agree with that Arlington Person. Construction monies and payroll monies are 2 different colors of money. TCC collected the tax money for specific construction of facilities. If the construction is within or under budget... it should be returned to the property tax payer, and not reallocated to salaries for $3.6 million salary increases.
Sheesh... I'd like to have my income increased instead in the form of further reduced TCC tax !
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#1129
Posted 12 August 2010 - 08:13 PM
In a work environment where most are just thankful to have a job, medical, etc... they seem to never run out of signed blank checks. I'd like to know where those employees not at competitive market levels plan to move to should they not get their market adjustment? ...oh and a mere %2 for everyone else. They act as though if no one received a raise they'd come in on Monday and the place would be empty. Why not base raises and market adjustments solely on the revenue increases from new students? If they have to use the surplus, why not save a few jobs in other sections of Tarrant County that's experiencing some serious belt tightening?
Does the TCC entity have no oversight, what entity / group is responsible for these people, who's keeping track of their helmets? They definitely need some form of supervision!
Better Business Bureau: A place to find or post valid complaints for auto delerships and maintenance facilities. (New Features) If you have a valid gripe about auto dealerships, this is the place to voice it.
#1130
Posted 13 August 2010 - 12:11 PM
As always, I think this is going to wind up being an interesting building. Not necessarily beautiful or pretty or fitting for the area, but for sure interesting. I give more bonus points for different and interesting than pretty much any thing else. I am tired of boring architecture. I am for sure willing to see how this complex winds up. It has a pretty different direction, in my book, than it did several months ago. Still not convinced I won't love it in the end. Many people (most, at least the most verbal members) are going to hate this structure no matter what. Go for it. I will wait and see. And again, I believe public buildings should all be in abandoned warehouses. (City Hall, Prisons, IRS, Public Colleges and all others.) But I hope the best for this complex that cost-wise, smart or otherwise, is coming right out of my pocket, is in my City and will be looking at the rest of my life.
#1131
Posted 16 August 2010 - 08:06 AM
#1132
Posted 16 August 2010 - 08:09 AM
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#1133
Posted 16 August 2010 - 11:08 AM
15 mins earlier and you would have caught me on my bike on the Trinity Trail!
#1134
Posted 16 August 2010 - 11:29 AM
Uh, probably weekly if not daily.
#1135
Posted 16 August 2010 - 02:41 PM
We were in construction management - ours were following our monthly staff meetings.
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#1136
Posted 16 October 2010 - 05:32 PM
#1137
Posted 17 October 2010 - 07:43 PM
Better Business Bureau: A place to find or post valid complaints for auto delerships and maintenance facilities. (New Features) If you have a valid gripe about auto dealerships, this is the place to voice it.
#1138
Posted 02 January 2011 - 08:11 PM
Here are today's shots for your inspection.
#1139
Posted 02 January 2011 - 08:51 PM
Nice photos wow. I've been anxious to stop at this location and see the progress, but you saved me for the time being of having to do so.
#1140
Posted 03 January 2011 - 01:10 PM
I'm somewhat with you Brian on the design. I think there are some parts that could have been done better and I definitely don't think it fits in with the surrounding buildings, but as a whole I think there are far uglier buildings in downtown. (AT&T anyone?) In many ways it reminds me of a lot of what I see when I visit downtown Vancouver. My bigger concerns are more with the massive cost overruns, the lack of oversight, and the graft and corruption shown during all parts of the decision-making process.
#1141
Posted 04 January 2011 - 12:12 PM
In many ways it reminds me of a lot of what I see when I visit downtown Vancouver. My bigger concerns are more with the massive cost overruns, the lack of oversight, and the graft and corruption shown during all parts of the decision-making process.
Wasn't Bing Thom, Architects of Vancouver. B.C. part of the conceptual design team for the administration building, (now allied health sciences/nursing school) the cancelled downtown TCC campus, as well as the entire Trinity Vision downtown "Island" development? Given this project's dismal record and weird visual juxtaposition with our 19th century courthouse, it will be interesting to see how much of this Trinity Vision project will bear Bing Thom's "distinctive" architectural style. At least this almost completed building should be low-maintenance...
#1142
Posted 04 January 2011 - 04:51 PM
#1143
Posted 05 January 2011 - 10:26 AM
"east campus"
#1144
Posted 05 January 2011 - 06:05 PM
#1145
Posted 05 January 2011 - 09:06 PM
There have been a lot of what appear to be surface lots going in immediately to the east of the main buildings.
Pretty sure the surface lots to the East are where they are going to build the new Civil Courts Building...
#1146
Posted 05 January 2011 - 10:11 PM
#1147
Posted 05 January 2011 - 10:54 PM
The historic Trinity Bluffs will sport a surface parking lot overlooking the TRV/Trinity Bottoms..
How Sweet!
I wonder if they plan dark gray pavers to match the bunkers on the bluff?
Pete Charlton
The Fort Worth Gazette blog
The Lost Antique Maps of Fort Worth on CDROM
Website: Antique Maps of Texas
Large format reproductions of original antique and vintage Texas & southwestern maps
#1148
Posted 07 January 2011 - 10:29 AM
#1149
Posted 07 January 2011 - 09:36 PM
Exactly right.I guess the nice thing about a surface lot on valuable proporty is that it can easily be converted into something better. I like this more than some sort of under-use like a two-story half-arsed office building or a Burger Street or worse.
#1150
Posted 09 January 2011 - 04:46 PM
At least this almost completed building should be low-maintenance...
I'm not sure there's anything "low-maintenance" about all of that glass, at least from a cleaning perspective.
Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Downtown, Trinity River Vision, Modern Architecture, Construction Photographs, Tarrant County
Downtown
Architecture →
Historic Buildings and Preservation →
Interior Photos of the Tarrant County CourthouseStarted by John T Roberts, 15 Jan 2024 Downtown |
|
|||
Projects and New Construction →
Ideas and Suggestions for Projects →
Filling Empty Spaces in DowntownStarted by Jeriat, 26 Jun 2023 Sundance Square, Downtown and 8 more... |
|
|||
Downtown
Projects and New Construction →
Residential →
Oil and Gas BuildingStarted by eastfwther, 05 Jan 2023 Downtown, 309 W. 7th |
|
|||
Downtown
Architecture →
Local History →
Implosion of the Worth Hotel - Oct. 29, 1972Started by John T Roberts, 29 Nov 2022 Downtown |
|
|||
Downtown
Planning →
City Issues →
New QT's traffic problem?Started by johnfwd, 22 Sep 2022 Downtown |
|
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users