386 replies to this topic

[Thurman52]

On the Bellaire/ Arbor Lawn settlement with Overton Woods what is he finall outcome?

I ask b/c in last night's city council they approved earthwork for the Arbor Lawn extentsion as part of the 121 project

http://www.fortworth...date=11/15/2005

[John T Roberts]

The groundbreaking for Arborlawn will be held on December 6th. This is the first project relating to the Southwest Parkway to actually get under construction.

This week's Fort Worth Business Press has an article on the start of construction:
http://www.fwbusines...lay.php?id=4170

[grow_smart]

Last I saw the Bellaire extension through Edwards Ranch is to curve southward to intersect Arborlawn. Arborlawn will be made a through street westward to Bryant Irvin and it will intersect SH121T as well.

So Bellaire will remain on the long list of streets that are non-continuous. As opposed to the long list of streets that are continuous but change names along the way.

I believe this alignment option was a compromise with the Overton Woods neighborhood that was made back in 2003. Bellaire was supposed to go through to Bryant Irvin, but the neighborhood was concerned about traffic.

[John T Roberts]

Grow smart, you are correct. The change in routing of those streets was a compromise to the Overton Woods neighborhood. They did not want access to the parkway, but they also did not want Bellaire Drive South to even connect to Bryant Irvin.

This has been the second rerouting of Bellaire Drive South. The original thoroughfare plan of the city called for the street to have a full intersection at Bryant Irvin. The section in Meadows West (South of I-20) was the first portion of the extension of the street completed. Eventually the street was constructed through Benbrook to make the western connection of the proposed intersection with Bryant Irvin. After that part was completed, the residents of Overton Woods persuaded the city to modify the thoroughfare plan to make the extension of Bellaire Drive South from the east to intersect Bryant Irvin further north than the section from the west. If this plan had been constructed, then Bellaire would have jogged at Bryant Irvin.

The final change is the one that will be constructed. Arborlawn will curve northward from its current end at International Plaza and will end at Bryant Irvin Road somewhere between Bellaire Drive South and the river. Bellaire Drive South will then be extended from its current end at Overton View Court. The street will be turned southward to end at Arborlawn before that street has the interchange with the Southwest Parkway.

[chrisalan9]

Do you guys really think that SW parkway is going to help traffic in the Hulen/Bryant Irving corridor? I think they need to find a way to get Hulen traffic on 20 West bound w/o having to go to Bryant Irvin & Bryant Irvin traffic on 20 East bound w/o having to go to Hulen. Both of those intersections could be less congested if there was better planning for that area. It would be a whole lot cheaper and more effective to me.

[hooked]

Slightly off topic, but I caught part of a story this weekend on NPR about a book or article titled "A Desire Named Streetcar." From what little I heard, I gathered that the author's main argument was that buses are much more efficient than any other form of mass transit. Anybody seen this book/article?

[JBB]

From the editorial:

"The parkway's price tag is higher because it is being built in a highly urbanized area"

That made me throw up in my mouth just a little.

[Redshirt]

City buying property for toll road
By MIKE LEE
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

FORT WORTH - The city is buying businesses in the path of the future Southwest Parkway and could have all the property in hand by the beginning of next year, officials said Tuesday.

The first phase of the toll road, also known as Texas 121, is expected to stretch 8.1 miles from Interstate 30 near Summit Avenue southwest to Dirks Road near Bryant Irvin Road. A second phase will eventually stretch to Cleburne.

The city bought 143 acres of undeveloped land from the Edwards and Geren families, whose ranch once covered most of what is now southwest Fort Worth. The families donated an additional 43 acres.

Buying the remaining land is touchy because it is home to dozens of established businesses, some of which have been around for decades. City Council members, saying they want to ease the burden on businesses, have approved spending extra money to compensate business owners for relocation costs.

"Many of these business owners bought land or signed leases at a value that they can't replace," Councilwoman Wendy Davis said during a briefing on the acquisitions.

In all, 59 businesses will be moved and 47 tracts bought. Most of the businesses are near Vickery Boulevard between Summit Avenue and Hulen Street.

Consultants hired by the city have opened an office in the parkway's corridor and have been meeting with landowners, said Mike Weaver, a consultant with Prime Strategies.

The $825 million parkway is a joint project of the city, the Texas Department of Transportation and the North Texas Tollway Authority. Fort Worth is responsible for the right of way for the main lanes, and the Transportation Department is buying the right of way for the two large interchanges at Interstates 30 and 20.

State and federal law require each parcel to be appraised twice before the city makes an offer. Owners who disagree with the city's appraisals can make a counteroffer. The city can also condemn the land under the rules of eminent domain. If that happens, a court-appointed panel will set the land's value and, the owners will have to sell.

Once the city owns the land, it will be responsible for maintaining the land and managing some of the offices and commercial buildings until parkway construction begins.

"We basically become a landlord," Weaver said.

Construction is expected to start in 2008, and the tollway's first section could open in 2010.



Here's a link to the article: City Buying Property for Toll Road

[cberen1]

Today's S-T article http://www.dfw.com/m...fw/13932377.htm about the funnel rework provides interesting comparative numbers relative to cost effectiveness: The funnel north of the airport is slated for a redo that will save time for 200-350,000 cars per day at a cost of $762 million. The SW Pkwy will affect approximately 30,000 cars/day at $825 million. The SW Parkway is projected to save 5-6 minutes of travel time compared to exiting routes. I don't know about the funnel project, but I've been in that traffic and I'll bet the time saved is at least equivalent.

So for about the same money, the funnel helps ten times as many drivers save about as much time.

Is that to say that Ft. Worth should wait until 200 - 350,000 people are stuck in traffic every day before it does anything?

[JBB]

That's an apples to oranges comparison. Most of the cars going through the funnel are on a commute while the cars clogging SW FW are local traffic. The Porkway will do very little to alleviate the local congestion.

[Bradleto]

Greg/Others,

Was there ever any study about the possibility of renovating/adapting/dedicating Vickery to aleviate the traffic concerns of SW Fort Worth? I'd have to look at the proposed pathway for the Southwest Parkway to compare its route, but I have always wondered about Vickery as a viable alternative. It's and old artery but well-positioned to be used as an asset again since it effectively links the two areas together.

Vickery near downtown, well, there's not much there and it's pretty sparse at other stretches as it approaches I-20. If certain streets were closed off to Vickery, for example Hulen, so that Hulen traffic would be forced to maneuver between 20 and 30 on Hulen alone, and perhaps the same thing for the Bryant Irving/Vickery intersection, it seems a sort of dedicated boulevard could be developed, cheaply too, to move traffic quickly between the central city and the southwest area. I recall that Vickery runs all the way down into Benbrook, though I have not driven that portion of the road for many years. I suppose some thought would have to be given regarding how to move the cars onto Vickery from that area down there; then too, a good design to have Vickery feed into Downtown as easily as possible.

I guess what I am thinking is we sort of have the "run" between the two areas already in place so all we would need to develop would be the interfaces at each end.

For Fort Worth residents, a renovated Vickery seems a possibility; a little tougher for our neighbors to the south, no doubt.

A local attorney told me a few years ago that when 287 was being promoted to citizens, it was then suggested that the majority of benefits would accrue to Fort Worth when, in fact, it has been South Arlington and Mansfield benefiting the most and by a very wide margin.

So, if my idea doesn't float, I wonder for those of us not inclined to support the Southwest Parkway, are there some legitimate alternative a lot less expensive?

Cheers! Brad

[safly]

Totally agreed on VICKERY. It already exists and runs the path along the intended Parkway. Just needs widening.

Wonder why nobody has ever thought about it?

[Bradleto]

Greg, most likely for sure... that Vickery run doesn't pass through the right properties. I'll have to take a look at it on Google Earth, measure it, and consider a decent boulevard speed of, say, 45 mph... my guess is if it was widened and sort of dedicated to commuters from the SW Fort Worth area, they could jump on Vickery, without Hulen and Bryant Irvin adding traffic to it, and zoom downtown in a matter of minutes.

Riverside Drive on the north end of downtown is another run-down artery that feeds into west Fort Worth... looks like Hell, and might be a future candidate for fast tracking folks from the far west side of town as it develops.

Brad

[Bradleto]

Greg/All,

I used the measurement device found in Google Earth to measure Vickery from where it intersects with Main St. south of Downtown FW and the intersection at SW Blvd. That distance, in a point to point straight line, is 6.70 miles. Extending farther down to the I20/Vickery intersect is 8.79 miles, again, as the crow flies.

At 45 mph and using an 8 mile figure, once commuters got on a revamped Vickery, they'd be in downtown in 10.67 minutes. Not bad if all we had to do is develop feeders to get them on and off Vickery on both ends. Hulen, Bryant Irvin and Montgomery traffic don't really need access to Viclery, so closing down unnecessary intersections would do the trick to remove stops and starts and let the traffic flow freely.

Again, from an untrained eye, much of the land bordering along Vickery seems, at best, underutilized, and a lot of it is wide open on the train track side.

Expand it to 6 lanes and let her rip. Brad

[pelligrini]

I'm pretty sure there were some studies done on using Vickery. I'm not sure if the plans included going all the way out West, but I did see some drawings of some changes that were going to happen to it between Henderson and Main. This was maybe 3-5 years ago. It was to be straightened out and connect across Henderson.

[pelligrini]

This is all I could find on the Vickery proposal. This is from a Fort Worth South Newsletter. As far as I know, it's dead too.

Vickery - The agreement between Texas Department of Transportation and the City to rebuild Vickery was signed in 1996. At that time
the construction letting date was January 2000. That date has now been adjusted to January 2004. The project calls for the construction
of a new roadway between the I-30 access/egress ramps at Henderson and the current alignment of Vickery at Hemphill Street, and the
reconstruction of the existing street between Hemphill and S. Main Street. The causes for delay are many, but primarily it’s due to the
historical preservation aspect (Jennings tunnel) of the environmental impact study. The EIS is now due to be finished in January 2003.
With this aspect completed, the alignment can be confirmed and the 10 remaining parcels of right-of-way land can be purchased. The
City’s 50% share of the cost is an approved capital improvement program item, although cost overruns are the City’s responsibility.

[safly]

You are confusing the goals of transportation with development.

The Porkway is about development: Edwards Ranch, the joint Edwards-Geren holdings, the Bass property in far southwest Tarrant and north-central Johnson County, etc.

A Vickery improvement would help transportation but would not develop anything. The Porkway only cuts 5 minutes of travel between Cityview and downtown over existing routes, so how much real transportation is involved?

But to answer the question about Vickery: no, that alternative was not studied.

What's to stop Vickery from a good redevelopming. Would cost less to accomplish and be that more accessible for FW'ians. If thousands of folks choose to live in the boonies, then they should pay for their own path. This SW Parkway will definitiely NOT increase exposure into those parts, just more traffic back towards here. This Vickery way could be a pretty big deal if done right. Landscaped medians, widen lanes, bike routes, improved sidewalks and possible light rail or trolley. It could end being like a PCH 1 or Sepulveda Blvd. out in L.A. I'd rather see Vickery developed than big boxes off of this SW monstrosity.

[safly]

If EVERYONE is saying that DTFW is the place to build and live or THE TREND, well then why are we bothering with looking to develop out in tha STICKS?

Speaking of sticks, gotta go roundup my annual fish sticks for Ash Wed and Lent.

[Fort Worthology]

If EVERYONE is saying that DTFW is the place to build and live or THE TREND, well then why are we bothering with looking to develop out in tha STICKS?

Well, obviously, because developers are wanting space to build things that rival the staggering beauty of Cityview!

[safly]

You are sooo right. Who in the HECK would want to live out in them parts and find the multi- billion dollar need to make a quick drive to FW? Maybe 40K people or so. GENIUSES!

This is CRAPOLA!

[mosteijn]

If EVERYONE is saying that DTFW is the place to build and live or THE TREND, well then why are we bothering with looking to develop out in tha STICKS?

Hey, if you want to give all us families who DO live in the "sticks" enough money and space to live in downtown Fort Worth, I'm sure a bunch of us would be pretty happy to move there...but since I'm guessing that even you don't have that kind of money, we're stuck out here with the rest of our hard working, middle-class, 3+ children buddies. When downtown stops only catering to the wealthy singles and couples of the world, they let's talk about "why in the HECK" people would want to live out in these Godforsaken sticks you speak of.

Although...it would be a good trade off to give these 800 million dollars to all the residents of SWFW who do want to live somewhere more convenient and pleasant...sure it would only cover about 800 families, but why not?

[safly]

I didn't say GODFORSAKEN.

Love the last part of your post. Funny, but could POSSIBLY work.

Developers would see it as a solution to help offset the cost incurred on a "notable DOWNPAYMENT" for your new DTFW digs. No need to develop or create the SWFW, more people choose to live in DTFW and surrounding areas. This will stir more DTFW development, market levels to a wide variety of clientele. All is good.

Let's say $800 million divided by 10- 50K? How does that sound? This can be part of some lottery program for FW. Can you imagine when the word gets out about this program. "Boomtown" would be understating the description of FW then. I say we do this every local election year in July. 1 ticket per household (of tenant/owner) per district of FW.

Any lawyers on board to help draft this resoultion? Anyone without an "ethic bone" in their body? Anyone?

[AndyN]

A recent study by North Texas Tollway Authority reported that tolls paid on Southwest Parkway will for many years cover less than half the authority’s costs to build it, partly because the road will be designed for a 50 mph speed limit...

Officials seek to make up difference for Southwest Parkway

Ugh. This is the first time I noticed this. Why is the parkway only designed for 50 mph? Is this some compromise to local neighborhoods to reduce noise levels or is it a compromise to reduce the cost of right-of-way acquisition by allowing for tighter curves and shorter sight distance or is it a compromise on sanity.

Oh but to own land in Southwest Tarrant County.

[JBB]

*snicker*

Look at that. Trying to make sense out of anything to do with the Porkway. Silly.

[youngalum]

The reason for the ight costs to build was to satisfy all the complaining that the neighborhhoods had on this project.

It still might get coverted back to a tollway with highway speeds and really the neighborhoods can do little but fight a losing legal battle.

I'll be shocked if it gets built as it is currently proposed and the funding issues.

[EricTCU]

Parkway or not, Bryant Irvin @ I-20 and Hulen @ I-20 need RELIEF!

Should the plan fall apart, is there or will there be a contengent conjestion relief plan for City View??

[safly]

I agree. The TXDoT layouts were horrendous. It just needs some tweaking here or there to make a HUGE difference. Not some PORK.

Entering BI or Hulen from opposite bounds of I-20 and 820 in that area just make you crazy sometimes, especially if you don't travel there often. You end up having to cut people off to get over a lane, or be cut off.

Happy St. Patties Day! Looking NOT to get CUTOFF at a DTFW bar tonight.

[Buck]

When does the crusade begin for a boulevard instead of a tollway?

[redzeep]

EDWARDS FAMILY DEVELOPS LAST CITY RANCH PARCELS
FORT WORTH (star-telegram.com) – Land once part of a busy cattle ranch founded by Lemuel Edwards in 1848 is finally going to be developed. The Edwards family continues to control the land and was not ready to develop the wooded 1,000-acre property, centrally located in Fort Worth, until issues about road rights-of-way were settled.
Now that the location of the proposed Southwest Parkway is known, work will begin. The Cassco Land Co., which is a family-owned company run by Crawford Edwards, will build a three-phase project that will include luxury homes, parkland and shopping and office centers. The property consists of several large tracts between Bryant Irvin Rd. and Hulen St. and from Vickery Blvd. to south of I-20.
Cassco said it saved the best land for last. The development is along 2.25 miles of the Clear Fork of the Trinity River. The company donated 43 acres and sold 143 acres to the city for the highway project. That leaves 850 acres for development.



A gift to developers was my vote.

[Yossarian]

A gift to developers was my vote.

...

The company (Cassco) donated 43 acres

And at least one developer reciprocated...

[safly]

Speaking of PORKway.

I just now saw our very own Rep. Granger on a FOX News channel interview. She was shown in front of the N side of the RS campus. And guessing by today's weather, I am sure she was in front of a prop.

[Urbndwlr]

Parkway or not, Bryant Irvin @ I-20 and Hulen @ I-20 need RELIEF!

Should the plan fall apart, is there or will there be a contengent conjestion relief plan for City View??

How far does the northbound traffic on Bryant Irvin and on Hulen back up on an average morning commute?
(i.e. to what street or in front of what building are there usually cars stopped for more than a few seconds?)

thanks

[Urbndwlr]

When does the crusade begin for a boulevard instead of a tollway?

I think a long time ago. I believe the idea is to provide a redundant path to Bryant Irvin and Hulen, but to do so in a way that minimizes disruption to the center parts of the city (visually, acoustically, and environmentally). A high speed road would have greater negative impacts in all three of those categories. Most consituents of the center city appeared to oppose the construction of a radial artery that enables longer commutes to farther-out bedroom communities, and to any high speed road that would destroy the remaining visual integrity of our open spaces along the Trinity River.

As you can tell the need for the new road is questionable. Understandably there is conjestion at certain points around I-20, however many people seriously question the logic of constructing an entire, brand new road to alleviate a few saturation points.... especially when history indicates that such new capacity does not solve such problems, but rather only temporarily alleviates them.

The problem is that most people don't follow this stuff that closely, and they are, understandably, compelled to voice support for any drastic measure to solve their frustrating wait in traffic - without really understanding or really caring about the long-term costs (both direct and indirect economic and social costs of extending our city out even farther and losing rural land out toward Glen Rose to new suburban tract-housing)

[safly]

I'd HATE for Glen Rose to become a suburbia of any city. Gorgeous hill country topography just absolutely dominates the area, unlike Tarrant.