132 replies to this topic

[Austin55]

I'll get optimistic when they're actually turning dirt.

 

I'm hopeful!

 

...including one specifically for skyscrapers.

 

Which one?

 

 

Perhaps you could start a few more threads...

 

 

Most all of the projects have their own threads.

[RenaissanceMan]

I'll get optimistic when they're actually turning dirt.

 
I'm hopeful!
 

...including one specifically for skyscrapers.

 
Which one?
 

 Perhaps you could start a few more threads...
 

 
Most all of the projects have their own threads.

I think you might have missed the joke

[Urbndwlr]

Regarding the statement that the Sundance Square organization intimidates outside developers who would otherwise develop desired projects, i think this is potentially partially true.  I have heard that the City of Fort Worth and in general Downtown Fort Worth Inc's current philosophy is to really promote 1) residential density, 2) full service hotels, 3) education of various sorts.  Not office space.  The assumption is that Downtown Fort Worth has decent but not super strong demand for office space growth, and with trends of more people per square foot in office buildings everywhere around the world, that it just isnt as much of a pressing need, and therefore not as worthy of financial support. 

 

In urban areas like Downtown Fort Worth, practically every development project needs some sort of assistance from the public sector - even if it means clearing obstacles to development.  So, the City and DFWI are in a position to really reinforce those priorities.  Its not that they discourage office development - they just don't explicitly pursue growth in office development since they feel it will simply dilute the existing office market and actually damage the economics of the existing properties. 

 

I understand that but still see it as dissapointing.  The exception is probably the owner occupied or owner-anchored building such as the proposed Jetta Operating buiding or Pier 1's building or Radio Shack's.  Where the company made the committment to make the big investment, and as part of the project, made additional space available for other tenants or for their own growth.    In fairness, that's what we've seen in almost all other cities: a large company that is community minded, decides to make a lasting statement to its city and employees by designing and constructing a building that will last, hopefully, for centuries - usually longer than the company itself.

 

Certainly we can all take our hats off to XTO, Bob Simpson and his partners for making that bold gesture to Downtown Fort Worth over the last decade.  Hopefully we will have more corporate citizens such as Simpson and his partners continue to invest in restoring old and building new, interesting, well designed buildings in our city center, reinforcing the importance and quality of a dense urban center. 

[urbancowboy]

Regarding the statement that the Sundance Square organization intimidates outside developers who would otherwise develop desired projects, i think this is potentially partially true.  I have heard that the City of Fort Worth and in general Downtown Fort Worth Inc's current philosophy is to really promote 1) residential density, 2) full service hotels, 3) education of various sorts.  Not office space.  The assumption is that Downtown Fort Worth has decent but not super strong demand for office space growth, and with trends of more people per square foot in office buildings everywhere around the world, that it just isnt as much of a pressing need, and therefore not as worthy of financial support. 
 
In urban areas like Downtown Fort Worth, practically every development project needs some sort of assistance from the public sector - even if it means clearing obstacles to development.  So, the City and DFWI are in a position to really reinforce those priorities.  Its not that they discourage office development - they just don't explicitly pursue growth in office development since they feel it will simply dilute the existing office market and actually damage the economics of the existing properties. 
 
I understand that but still see it as dissapointing.  The exception is probably the owner occupied or owner-anchored building such as the proposed Jetta Operating buiding or Pier 1's building or Radio Shack's.  Where the company made the committment to make the big investment, and as part of the project, made additional space available for other tenants or for their own growth.    In fairness, that's what we've seen in almost all other cities: a large company that is community minded, decides to make a lasting statement to its city and employees by designing and constructing a building that will last, hopefully, for centuries - usually longer than the company itself.
 
Certainly we can all take our hats off to XTO, Bob Simpson and his partners for making that bold gesture to Downtown Fort Worth over the last decade.  Hopefully we will have more corporate citizens such as Simpson and his partners continue to invest in restoring old and building new, interesting, well designed buildings in our city center, reinforcing the importance and quality of a dense urban center. 

Well said, I think it's critical that we get more workers downtown. However, we don't want a glut of spec space. Fort Worth needs to build up and expand its corporate portfolio. I think jobs in our downtown is critical to maintaining and improving our status both regionally and nationally.

[johnfwd]

Not sure where to put this comment regarding urban density, since discussion on the topic has been overlapping on at least four different threads, lately.  One thing we may not realize is that, over the long-term, the boundaries of Fort Worth's downtown (as we perceive them) are going to expand beyond the Sundance Square-dominated core.  Forgetting the east side for now, someday we will include as "downtown" the Panther Island developments to the north.   Some don't think of the areas south of Lancaster as downtown because they've been neglected for a long time.  But gentrification of these areas is continuing apace, such that the old perceptions may give way.  And, of course, to the west, the prevailing argument is whether or not the recently developed cultural district and west seventh projects should be considered part of downtown.  What I'm saying is that "downtown" Fort Worth still has space to grow outward, which may continue to stunt it's vertical growth toward the core (other factors notwithstanding).  Maybe I should have put this in the thread about downtown high rises?

[Austin55]

I generally define downtown by it's walkable areas, anything West of Burnett, East of Calhoun, North of Belknap and south of Lancaster isn't really a true "downtown". But even that is stretching it, the core really starts to come apart once you've walked more than 2 blocks in any direction from from Main between 9th and 2nd. There's very little reason to walk past Calhoun or Throckmorton.


I feel what will be really important is connecting the 3 or 4 (W7, Fairmount, Stockyards, Hillside/Samuels) big urban together into one seamless entity. 

 

[Fort Worthology]

Anything south of Lancaster isn't downtown because downtown stops just south of Lancaster, and you're in the Near Southside after that.  

 

It's super pedantic, I know, but I do get bothered by the assumption that any place dense and walkable in the central city is "downtown" because it makes it sound like dense and walkable is something that *only* applies to "downtown."  I'm fine with the actual definition of "Downtown Fort Worth" - the area bounded by the Trinity River on the west and north and the railroad tracks (or I-35/30, whatever floats your boat) on the south and east.

 

We should be trying to knit together the various surrounding districts into a seamless place with the actual downtown Fort Worth (cough, cough, better transit, cough cough, better pedestrian connections, cough cough, more infill development) but we can let 'em keep their own names and identities that have developed on their own with no help from Downtown Fort Worth, Inc.

[johnfwd]

Anything south of Lancaster isn't downtown because downtown stops just south of Lancaster, and you're in the Near Southside after that.  

 

It's super pedantic, I know, but I do get bothered by the assumption that any place dense and walkable in the central city is "downtown" because it makes it sound like dense and walkable is something that *only* applies to "downtown."  I'm fine with the actual definition of "Downtown Fort Worth" - the area bounded by the Trinity River on the west and north and the railroad tracks (or I-35/30, whatever floats your boat) on the south and east.

 

We should be trying to knit together the various surrounding districts into a seamless place with the actual downtown Fort Worth (cough, cough, better transit, cough cough, better pedestrian connections, cough cough, more infill development) but we can let 'em keep their own names and identities that have developed on their own with no help from Downtown Fort Worth, Inc.

Kevin, you seem to be sounding too defensive about your positions lately.  No need to be, as I've enjoyed reading your thoughtful insights here as well as when you had the Fort Worthology online magazine

[Fort Worthology]

Kevin, you seem to be sounding too defensive about your positions lately.  No need to be, as I've enjoyed reading your thoughtful insights here as well as when you had the Fort Worthology online magazine

 

 

 

 

 

I am completely cynical and bitter these days re: Fort Worth issues, totally admit to that, BUT - I really don't feel like that last post was "defensive" at all.  Just saying - "Downtown Fort Worth" is a thing that has a definition.

[renamerusk]

 

....  No need to be, as I've enjoyed reading your thoughtful insights here as well as when you had the Fort Worthology online magazine

 

I am completely cynical and bitter these days re: Fort Worth issues, totally admit to that, BUT - I really don't feel like that last post was "defensive" at all.  Just saying - "Downtown Fort Worth" is a thing that has a definition.

 

 Aye and aye.

[McHand]

 

 "in the nation we are larger than Miami, Seattle, Boston, Denver, Detroit, Atlanta, New Orleans,"
 
​that's the problem we don't have the miami heat or the seattle seahawks, or boston red sox or the denver nuggets or the detroit redwings or the atlanta braves or the new orleans saints.

Certainly that helps, but then again... exactly which professional sports franchise does Austin have?

 

 

It doesn't need any.  It has SXSW.

[McHand]

 

It's definitely a fact that there's plenty of land around the edges of town here for sprawl to keep happening unchecked.  That's a ruinous attitude that will spell disaster for us in the future - "we've got plenty of land - let's use it in the most wasteful way possible" - but only a handful of people at City Hall and in the population care at all.  So we get token nods to developing the central city that results in some apartments here, an office there (along with the requisite 7,000 parking garages because we can't do transit well in Fort Worth), while we do absolutely nothing to either slow down the outward spread, or even to change its form to something more environmentally and economically sustainable.

What Kevin said.

I'll just add that it's worth considering the fact that Texas didn't suddenly gain a whole bunch of land in the past hundred years. America was great at building dense, well proportioned, well connected and vibrant cities and towns in the past. It's not as if all of a sudden someone turned around and said "oh hey! I never noticed all that land that is stretching out and away from the city! We could build everything out there instead!"

 

 

Once upon a time, it was farm and ranch land, so no one even considered developing it.

[Doohickie]

I get frustrated because coworkers who live in the cities near Fort Worth tend think of downtown as including the city core, which to them includes the Near Southside, W7 and the Stockyards. It's all downtown to people who don't actually live in Fort Worth.

[johnfwd]

I get frustrated because coworkers who live in the cities near Fort Worth tend think of downtown as including the city core, which to them includes the Near Southside, W7 and the Stockyards. It's all downtown to people who don't actually live in Fort Worth.

Good point.  I used to think downtown meant tall buildings and outside that were houses, shopping centers, and other relatively small structures.  Until, that is,. I took a trip to Miami, Florida, and was overwhelmed by high-rise condominiums and office buildings almost everywhere!  Guess that can be said of Houston, Dallas, New York, and most other major cities.  One thing I've tried to say in this thread is that perceptions of downtown can change if the pattern of urban density spreads from downtown outward (or even outside inward as will be case when urban density eventually fills in the Panther Island area just to north of downtown).  Other than the city's effort to implement zoning restrictions, there's really no self-imposed boundaries to downtown in the face of strong market demand for Class A office buildings, large-scale commercial projects, and residential high-rise condominiums.  Relatively free market forces demand otherwise.

[Austin55]

Prideftw. Many here like you, myself included. Also want a tall office tower. But this is Fort Worth after all .Just don't see happening. But good news. Dallas is building yet another 20 story mostly office tower in Uptown. Not very tall by Dallas standards . But very new Euro flashy design. That I like . I have not seen any night time renderings. But no doubt it will have porno lights all over the thing that can be seen from Mars . That I don't like.

 

 

 

Coming over from the Jetta Operating thread.

 

In the 10 past years, FW has built 4 skyscrapers. (Omni, Carnegie, Chesapeake and City Tower, the last two of which aren't even in downtown proper). A total of 1,176 feet of verticality.

 

In the same time frame, Dallas has built 26 high rises over 150 feet, according to Skyscraperpage. Just three of these (Azure, W, and Museum) total 1,374 feet of verticality. Now add in under construction buildings, the total comes to 36. Proposed towers comes to a whooping 54 high rises. 

 

Edit-No posting this out of anger of lack of highrises, just showing the comparison between the D and FW. They get compared relentlessly, I understand it is'nt a just comparison. But, there it is if you want it.

[hannerhan]

And if you think those Dallas numbers are high, look at what's going on in Houston.  And if you think those numbers are high, look at Hong Kong.  And if you think that's a big deal, look at Dubai...

 

It's all relative.  Dallas is a much bigger deal than Fort Worth is.  Not going to change any time soon.

 

That said, I do think (as some others have posted) we're due for a legitimately large office construction project downtown in the next couple of years.  There are too many energy companies around here that are hiring for this not to happen.

[renamerusk]

And if you think those Dallas numbers are high, look at what's going on in Houston.  And if you think those numbers are high, look at Hong Kong.  And if you think that's a big deal, look at Dubai...It's all relative. 

 

I agree.

 

Something that is interesting to observe about Dallas.  There really seems to be a shift from the older core of downtown to a shorter but more advance inventory of mid rise buildings in the Uptown area of Dallas.  Excluding condos, when, for instance, has there last been a 40+ story highrise office project built in the older core of downtown.  It looks very much to me that Uptown is feasting off of the old core.

[Fort Worthology]

 

And if you think those Dallas numbers are high, look at what's going on in Houston.  And if you think those numbers are high, look at Hong Kong.  And if you think that's a big deal, look at Dubai...It's all relative. 

 

I agree.

 

Something that is interesting to observe about Dallas.  There really seems to be a shift from the older core of downtown to a shorter but more advance inventory of mid rise buildings in the Uptown area of Dallas.  Excluding condos, when, for instance, has there last been a 40+ story highrise office project built in the older core of downtown.  It looks very much to me that Uptown is feasting off of the old core.

 

 

40+ stories?  No.  But there have been smaller downtown projects that have turned out really nicely, like Third Rail Lofts and the Mercantile development.

 

I don't feel like Uptown is feeding off downtown (more like downtown is held back by its slow progress in things like taming its streets for people rather than cars, apart from the absolutely excellent Main Street) - Uptown is naturally growing up because it has been a wild, runaway success in terms of building up a residential neighborhood, building off the back of the first major success from years back:  State-Thomas, which is still one of the best walkable urban neighborhoods I've seen in the United States.  Not all of Uptown is as well designed, from a walkability standpoint, as State-Thomas, but the whole area has a big critical mass situation going on.

[renamerusk]

 

And if you think those Dallas numbers are high, look at what's going on in Houston.  And if you think those numbers are high, look at Hong Kong.  And if you think that's a big deal, look at Dubai...It's all relative. 

 

I agree.

 

Something that is interesting to observe about Dallas.  There really seems to be a shift from the older core of downtown to a shorter but more advance inventory of mid rise buildings in the Uptown area of Dallas.  Excluding condos, when, for instance, has there last been a 40+ story highrise office project built in the older core of downtown.  It looks very much to me that Uptown is feasting off of the old core.

 

 

40+ stories?  No.  But there have been smaller downtown projects that have turned out really nicely, like Third Rail Lofts and the Mercantile development.....I don't feel like Uptown is feeding off downtown (more like downtown is held back by its slow progress in things like taming its streets for people rather than cars, apart from the absolutely excellent Main Street) -

 

I suppose its just a question of semantics: tall structures:mid-rise.; downtown:uptown

 

Like a lot of others here, I do hope for one or two super tall structures (40-60+) but I also realize that the era of tall structures are mainly a thing of the past and that not much is being built anywhere in the US except in two or three cities.  Fort Worth is likely to get in the future buildings in the 20-25+ range; and that will be all right too for a short and dense Fort Worth would be very nice.

 

Since nothing of new construction is or has been going on in the old core of downtown Dallas for sometime, I do think that Dallas' commercial expansion, sometimes called uptown, is depopulating the old core and is a significant factor that explains the anemic growth within the old core.  Several efforts have been made and or continuing to be made by Dallas to reverse the decline in the old core but it will likely fail because the product from new construction in uptown is much more desirable.  And why should the free market be disallowed to work its will if the new product is better?   The case that taming streets in the old core for pedestrians can reverse this trend or the will of the free market is dubious in my opinion, but only time will tell.

[Austin55]

And if you think those Dallas numbers are high, look at what's going on in Houston.  And if you think those numbers are high, look at Hong Kong.  And if you think that's a big deal, look at Dubai...

 

It's all relative.  Dallas is a much bigger deal than Fort Worth is.  Not going to change any time soon.

 

That said, I do think (as some others have posted) we're due for a legitimately large office construction project downtown in the next couple of years.  There are too many energy companies around here that are hiring for this not to happen.

 

Wasn't posting this out of anger of lack of highrises, just showing the comparison between the D and FW. They get compared relentlessly, I understand it is'nt a just comparison. But, there it is if you want it.

 

But- When looking at similar cities the size of Fort Worth-Charlotte has added several significant structures in the past ten years, about 27 total. Jacksonville, 12 Columbus, just 2, Detroit has 2, Memphis, 1. El Paso added none. 

 

 

 

 

 

I suppose its just a question of semantics: tall structures:mid-rise.; downtown:uptown

Like a lot of others here, I do hope for one or two super tall structures (40-60+) but I also realize that the era of tall structures are mainly a thing of the past and that not much is being built anywhere in the US except in two or three cities.  Fort Worth is likely to get in the future buildings in the 20-25+ range; and that will be all right too for a short and dense Fort Worth would be very nice.

 

Since nothing of new construction is or has been going on in the old core of downtown Dallas for sometime, I do think that Dallas' commercial expansion, sometimes called uptown, is depopulating the old core and is a significant factor that explains the anemic growth within the old core.  Several efforts have been made and or continuing to be made by Dallas to reverse the decline in the old core but it will likely fail because the product from new construction in uptown is much more desirable.  And why should the free market be disallowed to work its will if the new product is better?   The case that taming streets in the old core for pedestrians can reverse this trend or the will of the free market is dubious in my opinion, but only time will tell.

 

 

I'm not sure I totally agree that, while New York and Chicago build more skyscrapers in 6 months then FW has in 100 years, the past 10 years have seen OKC, Mobile, Austin, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Sacramento, Calgary, Vancouver and maybe a few others have built or are building new tallest buildings. In that time cities like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Charlotte, and others have amassed a pretty nice sized collection of new highrises.

[renamerusk]

 

.... I do think (as some others have posted) we're due for a legitimately large office construction project downtown in the next couple of years.  There are too many energy companies around here that are hiring for this not to happen.

 

No sooner said then what you think is becoming true.  What is needed is an Energy Tower for downtown.

 

http://fwbusinesspre...town-space.aspx

[cberen1]

I think the time is now.  If it hits the drawing board today, we're still a ways out from occupancy.  If it'll be more mid-rise stuff, then there ought to be one or two under construction all the time.  If we can get a big one done, then it needs to get moving.

[Austin55]

Is XTO still interested in consolidating or is that a dead idea?

[JBB]

Why would they be now if they haven't done so already?  The local gas industry is either bottoming out or continuing to decline.  New drilling is at an all time low (almost non-existent).  Even if the industry did return to the good ol' days of 8 years ago, it's hard to imagine XTO changing their downtown quarters significantly.  And XTO consolidating into a single building would do little more for the local market than satisfy the fetishes of those seeking to see new phallic structures downtown.  It would flood the market with open office space, much of it recently renovated and ready for use pretty quick.

[cberen1]

Why would they be now if they haven't done so already?  The local gas industry is either bottoming out or continuing to decline.  New drilling is at an all time low (almost non-existent).  Even if the industry did return to the good ol' days of 8 years ago, it's hard to imagine XTO changing their downtown quarters significantly.  And XTO consolidating into a single building would do little more for the local market than satisfy the fetishes of those seeking to see new phallic structures downtown.  It would flood the market with open office space, much of it recently renovated and ready for use pretty quick.

 

Well, except that Exxon/Mobil is centralizing all of their domestic drilling operations in Fort Worth.  So the administration of the Eagle Ford, Marcellus, Bakken, etc., which all include production of oil as well as gas, is coming out of DTFW.  Gas is cheap, but oil is still high.  Plus, if you listen to people like Rex Tillerson talk about it, they're thinking 30 years out, so current gas pricing is not a huge concern.

 

So I could see them doing it, particularly since they won't have the same architectural conservation bias of the former administration.

[renamerusk]

Why would they be now if they haven't done so already?

 

 I would think two things: (1)  that the Class A office space boom experienced by downtown is now 30-plus years old and their technology with it; (2)  that a new Class A office thats offers the latest innovations coud satisfy the needs of its tenants more effectively than would renovated space. 

[John T Roberts]

The Friends of the Texas Historical Commission had an event and tour of the W.T. Waggoner Building at the end of April, and XTO has more people in the downtown buildings now than when they were bought out.  XTO's Facility Manager left with Bob Simpson and her replacement is from Houston with little to no experience with historic buildings.  Although he did not disclose any future plans, he did state that he has come to appreciate the work that XTO had done in the past and the value of the historic buildings. 

 

They have a nice corporate campus right in the middle of downtown, so they may just stay with their current plans.  If they do consolidate into one new building, it will leave quite a bit of the existing historic building stock vacant in downtown.  The one good thing is that XTO has been smart enough to designate those buildings as local landmarks, so demolition won't be on the table if someone else ever purchases them.

[Austin55]

Business Journals listed 78 of Texas's boldest construction projects, anyone want to guess how many were from Fort Worth? 

 

Not one. 

 

For sure, we don't have nearly as much going on as Dallas, Austin, and Houston. But, there's no doubt we have some good things going here. Counting both U/C and proposals here. Some Smaller projects out there like 424 Summit and Museum place are both projects we've seen and are waiting on. Then we have a pair of massive mixed use projects in Left Bank and Clearfork. We have a high rise in Trinity Terrace. The New Will Rogers Arena is quite significant. And then there's arguably the boldest single project in the state in Panther Island.

[eastfwther]

^^^

The last thing Fort Worth did of any great architectural significance, imo,  was the Modern art museum.  This city is so incredibly safe with architecture, most of what gets built is just bland with zero imagination, especially the faux historical junk.  A little of that goes a long way.  Montgomery Plaza was a chance to do something really amazing and it turned into a cool building surrounded by a suburban shopping strip(s)..really disappointing. .  That  said, I do love the little office building built on W7th a few years ago, I can't  remember the name of it, but it has the cool metal/glass front on it.  I thought it was a really cool looking building for Fort Worth. But it's been a long time since anything was built here that I can say I really got excited about.  I think we might have made this list years ago, but there's nothing significant going on here now.  And this goes back to a comment I made on another thread which was that even as Fort Worth grows, we are still not seeing the types of development other cities are seeing, not even close. 

 

And somewhat off-topic..I went to San Antonio for the first time in years a few months ago.  And although,San Antonio has some big projects on this list, I found it odd that, besides hotels, there  were so few new buildings downtown...mainly residential. With every large city in Texas seeing urban growth, there didn't seem to be much in San Antonio.  Is there no market in San Antonio for downtown living? 

[eastfwther]

Business Journals listed 78 of Texas's boldest construction projects, anyone want to guess how many were from Fort Worth? 

 

Not one. 

 

For sure, we don't have nearly as much going on as Dallas, Austin, and Houston. But, there's no doubt we have some good things going here. Counting both U/C and proposals here. Some Smaller projects out there like 424 Summit and Museum place are both projects we've seen and are waiting on. Then we have a pair of massive mixed use projects in Left Bank and Clearfork. We have a high rise in Trinity Terrace. The New Will Rogers Arena is quite significant. And then there's arguably the boldest single project in the state in Panther Island.

But compared to most of this list, these are good projects for Fort Worth, but not really major.  The mixed use projects differ little than what's going on in many suburbs around the state..and they lack major office space. Trinity Terrace is a highrise, a rarity in Fort Worth, but it's part of a retirement community, hardly a game changer and there's no real movement on Panther Island.

[elpingüino]

Business Journals listed 78 of Texas's boldest construction projects, anyone want to guess how many were from Fort Worth? 

 

Not one. 

 

For sure, we don't have nearly as much going on as Dallas, Austin, and Houston. But, there's no doubt we have some good things going here. Counting both U/C and proposals here. Some Smaller projects out there like 424 Summit and Museum place are both projects we've seen and are waiting on. Then we have a pair of massive mixed use projects in Left Bank and Clearfork. We have a high rise in Trinity Terrace. The New Will Rogers Arena is quite significant. And then there's arguably the boldest single project in the state in Panther Island.

 

It's worth keeping in mind that this list was compiled by the Business Journals, which have four publications in Texas: Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio. It's no surprise, then, that all the highlighted projects are in those markets. If the Fort Worth Business Press (or publications in El Paso, Corpus Christi or Midland, for that matter) had contributed, I imagine the makeup of the list would be different.

[Doohickie]

So where is Fort Worth's urban growth?

Silly!  It's all along the streetcar lines!  You can't miss it!

[johnfwd]

Some thought here about always making comparisons with Dallas about economic development projects being planned here and there. In my opinion,  Fort Worth is so large now as to be viewed as if it was one metropolitan area in the region (like Oklahoma City is to Oklahoma).  I know it is difficult to contemplate this idea, as we've always thought of FW as being in Dallas's economic sphere of influence.  My thinking is that Fort Worth is now a magnet for population and economic growth on its own terms, more so than because of its proximity to Dallas.

 

Why do I think this?  Because, it seems to me, the growth of satellite communities is an indicator of the draw of the metropolitan area.  For a long time, west Fort Worth cities like Lake Worth and Aledo, and south Fort Worth cities like Burleson and Mansfield, were fairly moribund in growth trends (i.e., stagnant).  In recent years, these satellite communities have enjoyed what I call "spillover" growth from the Fort Worth metro area.  In other words, our suburbs are taking off!  This is somewhat analogous to how the Dallas-area satellite communities like Plano, Garland, Mesquite, and Duncanville experienced considerable growth during the period of the 1970s to the present time because Dallas itself was growing by leaps and bounds.

 

As I see it, Fort Worth is growing now because we're Fort Worth and not so much because we're in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.  I know this view is open to dispute, but I think it has the ring of some truth..

[Austin55]

It's been a good week, perhaps the new year rolling over cleared up some agreements to start things. In the past few days we've seen construction seemingly start or changes to the site on the following projects, 

 

-The Eyeworks Building

-Possibly on Museum Place

-Highpointe on S. Main

-Hemphill-Lamar connector

-River Tower II

-Forest Park & Rosedale building

-Hunter Plaza

-Post Office renovation

 

And we've gotten good news that Pinnacle Bank place should start soon.

[David Love]

So how far west of Sundance Square's west side boundary would you consider downtown Fort Worth, Henderson or the Trinity River?

 

...and why is it so difficult for businesses to thrive once they cross Taylor heading west of downtown?

[Austin55]

I would say Henderson , as everything West of it is fairly suburban feeling, I would call that Area the Upper West Side, unless something more appropriate exists. But like you said downtown is dead beyond Taylor. And Houston is the Eastern barrier for the most part. 

 

As to why, I guess its just a lack of connection. Houston street mostly has railroad tracks east of it, but Hillside and Samuals are somewhat connected to that area. Problem is those reisdential areas are'nt connected to downtown. 

 

From previous threads, 

 

 

Compare this map where red areas are surface parking lots

 

To this map of neighborhoods surrounding downtown

[Austin55]

So, in a few months we could have two 20+ story buildings rising at the same time.  That's pretty exciting. When was the last time that happened?

[Jeriat]

So, in a few months we could have two 20+ story buildings rising at the same time.  That's pretty exciting. When was the last time that happened?

 

The 80s. 

It's been a while...

[JBB]

Not quite 20 stories for each of them, but The Carengie, Trinity Terrace's City Tower, and the Omni were all under construction at one time.

[John T Roberts]

It was the early 1980's when two building 20 stories or greater were under construction at the same time.  There was a short period of time when Burnett Plaza, D.R. Horton, 777 Main, and the Wells Fargo Tower were all under construction at once.  Most people don't know this but three of those four buildings are former tallest in the city for a short period, only while they were under construction.  Wells Fargo was the first to top out, then 777 Main, then D.R. Horton, until finally Burnett Plaza became the tallest building.

[elpingüino]

The main story on the front page of today's Star-Telegram is an extensive report by Sandra Baker about downtown residential growth.

 

Free link: Downtown Fort Worth set for another growth spurt

[Fort Worthology]

It's easy to talk about the success of downtown residential growth when you lump in two areas that aren't part of downtown into the article.

 

Pedantic, maybe, but it bugs me when city people and journalists talk about "downtown growth" and then name things in 7th Street/Cultural District and the Near Southside as evidence for how great downtown is doing.  Those aren't downtown - not only do they have their own identities, but they are also physically separated from downtown and when talking about "urban living" and walking around you can't really count them as one place.

 

Maybe they meant "central city growth," but even somewhat linking something like Museum Place and the Near Southside developments to Downtown Fort Worth, Inc. (an organization which has *nothing* to do with those areas) is not accurate nor fair to groups like Fort Worth South, Inc. who have everything to do with the success of that district.

[Austin55]

This guy posts some interesting articles, he uses areas that had 5,000 people per square mile in 1960 as a way to define urban cores, and then compares those areas to todays population. In a lot of cases those areas have lost population. He did'nt do FW on its own but did do DFW as a whole. 

 

 

Another interesting post is this graph from Dallas (and comparing Boston) on growth vs distance from city hall from 2000-2010. Dallas peaks in growth around 23 miles from city hall, but loses a lot around 3-5 miles from the center. 

 

 

So, it seems as if, despite all the new construction, the core isn't growing after all? Shrunk at a 3.47% rate. 

Also worthy of mention, Austin ranks 2nd in % growth at 11.88%, and Fort Worth's recent population nemesis Charlotte ranked #1 by % at 12.46.

You can read a lot more here  http://swontariourbanist.blogspot.ca/

[Urbndwlr]

Looked at the Fort Worth map - appears they omitted from the "urban core" the entire Cultural District. 

I think it said that they only included census tracts that had a population of >5000 in 1960, which, if true, would miss any Downtown-adjacent growth that has taken place in former industrial districts - like LoDo in Denver, South of Market in SF, or the Cultural District in Fort Worth.   I dont have time to read the entire post but I did want to mention that observation. 

 

I sure wish the Census Bureau would split Fort Worth and Dallas MSAs - it really makes it difficult to assess our two cities and city centers as other cities are able to do. 

[eastfwther]

Thought this might go well here. 

https://greenlakeblu...lation-by-city/

 

 

The last paragraph about Fort Worth is very interesting: 

"Lastly, there are a tremendous number of cities that show 1%. These are often cities that think they have a uniquely fast-developing downtown living city, but really they need to take a look around them. I can attest that OKC and Ft. Worth in particular seem to think it is unique for having downtown revitalization, and many people in Ft. Worth (who clearly don’t make it past Tarrant County often) think it differentiates them from Dallas, which now has 150,000 people living in the neighborhoods adjacent to Downtown Dallas. All of this said, only two cities have a ratio that rounds down to 0%. Jacksonville and Houston, do better!"

 

Lastly, there are a tremendous number of cities that show 1%. These are often cities that think they have a uniquely fast-developing downtown living city, but really they need to take a look around them. I can attest that OKC and Ft. Worth in particular seem to think it is unique for having downtown revitalization, and many people in Ft. Worth (who clearly don’t make it past Tarrant County often) think it differentiates them from Dallas, which now has 150,000 people living in the neighborhoods adjacent to Downtown Dallas. All of this said, only two cities have a ratio that rounds down to 0%. Jacksonville and Houston, do better!

 

Keep in mind, downtown Dallas has about 1300 residential units under construction right now and another 5,000 in the immediate surrounding downtown area. 

[Jeriat]

Thought this might go well here. 

https://greenlakeblu...lation-by-city/

 

 

The last paragraph about Fort Worth is very interesting: 

"Lastly, there are a tremendous number of cities that show 1%. These are often cities that think they have a uniquely fast-developing downtown living city, but really they need to take a look around them. I can attest that OKC and Ft. Worth in particular seem to think it is unique for having downtown revitalization, and many people in Ft. Worth (who clearly don’t make it past Tarrant County often) think it differentiates them from Dallas, which now has 150,000 people living in the neighborhoods adjacent to Downtown Dallas. All of this said, only two cities have a ratio that rounds down to 0%. Jacksonville and Houston, do better!"

 

 

Keep in mind, downtown Dallas has about 1300 residential units under construction right now and another 5,000 in the immediate surrounding downtown area. 

 

...what's up with the shot at Ft. Worth? 

[Dylan]

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

 

I'd argue downtown Fort Worth is much nicer than downtown Dallas despite their larger downtown population.

[Austin55]

 

 

Ft. Worth in particular seem to think it is unique for having downtown revitalization, and many people in Ft. Worth (who clearly don’t make it past Tarrant County often) think it differentiates them from Dallas

 

Man, I don't even know what to think of this. I don't know anyone who think's that we are somehow unique just because Sundance is nice and has some new stuff. 

[Doohickie]

Yeah, it seems like it was.... invented.... based on the writer's bias more than reality.

[rriojas71]

This was my post to the writer of the article.

"Yes, Fort Worth's revitalization is nothing new and I don't know of anyone in our city forum who thinks it is unique. However, FW was one of the first American cities outside of the major American cities (NYC, Chicago, SF) to focus on and begin to revitalize it's downtown, starting in the late 80's and early 90's. I also remember reading in the 90's that city officials from several cities, including Cleveland, actually made trips here during the 90's to see what FW was doing right and what several other American cities were doing wrong. There wasn't much of a residential boom at that time because people were still flocking to the suburbs, but nonetheless we had established a foundation during that time to take advantage of the urban renewal that is currently sweeping across the nation. We still have a ways to go, but progress is being made and several new residential areas are still in the planning .

Just a word of advice. I have lived in other cities (SF, Seattle & Chicago) and I have traveled outside of Tarrant County, including Cleveland, so If you want to take a stab at a city's revitalization claims in comparison to other cities then that is fine. However, when you start attacking that city's residents as being misinformed or not well-traveled then your whole article just sounds elitist and turns to garbage."