Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Downtown: density vs height:


  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#1 SLO

SLO

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 227 posts

Posted 12 October 2006 - 04:08 PM

Density vs. height.
I have come around more to the opinion that taller buildings do not necessarily mean a better downtown. I would much rather see a larger more dense downtown with a great pedestrian quality (San Francisco), than a sleek and modern downtown of 60 story glass towers, that is dead at street level (Dallas). I dont mean to insult Dallas either, I think the skyline is very nice, they just need to work on the street level now, as they have been doing.
There is also the safety issue with extremely tall structures. 9/11 and the destruction of the World Trade Center showed how vulnerable these buildings can be.
Paris for example is a city of 5 to 10 story structures, completely mixed use and is a fantastic place to walk & live. There are some stray towers and an area of modern skyscapers (la Défense), which is interesting just in its contrast to the rest of the city. That area is completely dead though.
I havent seen much of the specifics for the Trinity River project, except for the renderings, but the scale and density really appeals to me for the above reasons.

#2 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 12 October 2006 - 04:25 PM

I completely agree. I think you will get in DTFW a few spread out skyscrapers amidst a dense, pedestrian friendly downtown. What I like about the contract is that I think the skyscrapers can serve as anchor points or landmarks for areas of downtown. Obviously there is a lot of infill to be done, but I imagine the area around the Omni will have a much different feel from the area around The Tower or the area around Burnett Plaza or Wells Fargo.

I think this whole thing could shape up very nicely.

#3 Redshirt

Redshirt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 142 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hurlburt Field, FL
  • Interests:I am and always will be a Texas resident. I was born and raised in Fort Worth. Currently, I am in the Air Force working on the CV-22 Osprey, supporting the Fort Worth economy by working on those Bell heliplanes. :) I am currently stationed at Hurlburt Field home of the Air Force Special Operations Command.

Posted 13 October 2006 - 05:40 AM

I have to agree with this also. I went to Paris last week and noticed how dense the area felt without the real presence of skyscrapers. Almost every building in Paris seems to be between four and six stories tall which creates a dense but not overly tall "skyline". BTW, I also visited Brussels and Amsterdam last weekend and for the most part they have the same feeling.

#4 vjackson

vjackson

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,324 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 13 October 2006 - 07:38 AM

A city's density, and perdestrian attractiveness, IMO, is a sign of good urban development and planning. And a city's skyline represents, IMO, a city's evolution, creativity and vision. My favorite cities have a good mixture of both density and height, which is probably why Dallas and Fort Worth, although I'm fond of both, have never been on my favorite cities list.

#5 AdamB

AdamB

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 356 posts
  • Location:Upper West Side
  • Interests:Living in the city

Posted 13 October 2006 - 10:36 AM

I dont have to have a tall skyline... I just want a couple landmark type buildings. I want a building to be built that is the focus of Fort Worth and when you see it you identify it with Fort Worth. Most major cities have some type of landmark. Something that is visible to everyone entering and leaving and something that defines the city. I think Fort Worth should work to get one as well.





#6 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 13 October 2006 - 04:11 PM

QUOTE(AdamB @ Oct 13 2006, 11:36 AM) View Post

...I want a building to be built that is the focus of Fort Worth and when you see it you identify it with Fort Worth. Most major cities have some type of landmark. Something that is visible to everyone entering and leaving and something that defines the city. I think Fort Worth should work to get one as well.


I think it should be built in the international style and have a huge revolving digital clock on the top tongue.gif

#7 SLO

SLO

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 227 posts

Posted 15 October 2006 - 08:04 PM

Good urban planning as mentioned is key and is no accident. The great cities were laid out in dense grids. Todays suburbs and suburban cities are not. Even as Fort Worth grows its downtown and residential towers are built and the downtown begins to thrive......dont you sometimes look at it and think 'whats the point', when the rest of the city averages 2 to 3 thousand people per square mile! You go to Paris or Amsterdam or London or New York or San Francisco and you are surrounded by this dense fabric of urban development that feels natural to these places. Then you go home to your town Charlotte or Denver or Orlando or Fort Worth and you see downtown areas that are trying to achieve this type of development....is it artificial, is it forced?
Does the vast majority love 'the city' or is it the few who try to recreate it in their fair town. Perhaps this is just the evolution of a city. But, I do contend that the overall vision should be in place.
To me its similar to the new urbanists who contend that most people want to live in a thriving small town pedestrian environment, but having these new towns or villages spread all around creation seems just as forced, when you have to drive to the suburbs to find one. The attraction to new urban environments and new downtown environments has two major things in common; relative density and pedestrian quality. Most people like to walk and be around other (friendly) people.
Sorry for rambling and having semi-coherent and fragmented thoughts here tonight........
Saying all Ive said, I still love the skyscraper, but do prefer a dense walkable city to a modern tall lifeless one. I think most US cities that 'grew' skyscrapers in the 70's, 80's and 90's are now trying to pedestrianize their downtowns now.

#8 crazyloco

crazyloco

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • Location:southwest

Posted 23 February 2007 - 08:20 PM

To be honest, I would like to see more of the whole city a little more dense and a lot more pedestrian friendly.

#9 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 14 December 2012 - 04:26 PM

Thanks for the info on height standards, you all. But I wasn't referring to what's allowable, only what's marketable in Fort Worth. The trend seems to be low-to-medium height buildings, even in the downtown environs. We've had discussions about why the new Sundance Square buildings are not high rises, why a prospective hotel builder on Calhoun Street may get by with only six floors, and the fact there hasn't been a high-rise in all of FW since the Carnegie Building.


Though this may not be exactly the appropriate place for this topic, here is my take:

Fort Worth adheres steadfastly to the “down economy rationale” and its regional sister cities of Dallas, Austin, Oklahoma City don’t or have not. Caution should be taken when you see what is happening in these cities that you do not believe your own eyes else, you will be left in disbelief.

If you fall prey to a conspiracy as I have that Fort Worth is virtually controlled by a small group of hometown power brokers, then you may began to question as I do the trend of low-medium height buildings and underwhelming projects across the city that do not have the potential to threaten the profitability of the major landowners in the CBD such as Sundance Square Mall and Simpson Properties. It is as though the free market is being hampered by the influential power of a few; and Fort Worth will someday evolve into a more sophisticated real estate market like those in its own region. Until then, a major speculative project, be it office or hotel, developed by an outside group would be a threat to these power brokers.

Keep Fort Worth folksy

#10 Brian Luenser

Brian Luenser

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 14 December 2012 - 05:34 PM

No big conspiracy, not big "Power Brokers" throwing their weight around. Just simple economics. You surely should build yourself a 30 story building anywhere in town. Hopefully it will fill up immediately with premium tenants because you will have some big time bills to pay. We have plenty of vacant space in town even if it is less than most towns today. Vacant offices, vacant retail, vacant housing, vacant everything. I am not building anything for sure. Not saying it could not pay off, just too much of a gamble for my money. I can tell you the City Council will approve your office tower with a record pace.
www.fortworthview.com

#11 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:07 PM

Jeriat that is an awesome map, never seen that before. I like how the height fall towards the lake. They do this in Sundance to, the close you get to the square the shorter a lot of the buildings you are. It creates a really nice big city feel but makes for really lively streets. With the lake it preserves views and would stop it from looking like Miami.

In regards to there not being a highrise under construction, it worries me more that there isnt even one proposed. Were looking at at least 5 years before one counting construction and planning times if a proposal would come up today. Maybe developers are holding back and waiting for TRV?


You have to wait until there's something there, first.

Right now, all the construction is in downtown, West 7th, and Near South. Gonna have to wait for the TRV.

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#12 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:39 PM

...Just simple economics.....We have plenty of vacant space in town even if it is less than most towns today. Vacant offices, vacant retail, vacant housing, vacant everything. I am not building anything for sure.... just too much of a gamble for my money.


There is more vacancy and a higher vacancy rate in Dallas than in Fort Worth; and the last time I checked, Dallas is joined at the hip with us in the same region and the same dire economy we so proudly hail as the DFW Metroplex, .

Of course when it comes to getting things done, we can laugh at Dallas with its silly Uptown, its ugly overhead powerline transit system, its new highrise hotels and bridges; and feel very confident at the safe distance of 30 miles that we are much smarter than it.

I have pinpointed the location of the Great Recession and it starts where I30 crosses Eastchase Parkway and heads to the west.

Keep Fort Worth colonial!

#13 Brian Luenser

Brian Luenser

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:27 PM

Major problems with Dallas real estate. They give away condos. Supply and demand. (High supply, nobody wants to live there) Fort Worth has just been smarter. I would like to see any evidence of anybody standing in the way of progress in Fort Worth. I am sure the media would love such a thing as well. Truth is, there is no news from, "Unless either the economy turns around or all the commercial and office space in town is full I am not going to risk much speculative building." No newspapers to sell on that. If building big buildings in Fort Worth right now made sense, you would be doing it. I know I would be.
www.fortworthview.com

#14 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,425 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 15 December 2012 - 11:38 AM

In order to buy into the theory that there's a shadowy group keeping tall buildings out of Fort Worth, you also have to believe that this group of real estate developers (yes, they all are) is willing to turn their back on what you say is a profitable segment of their business. And that is just plain lunacy.

#15 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 15 December 2012 - 05:34 PM

Major problems with Dallas real estate. They give away condos. Supply and demand. (High supply, nobody wants to live there) Fort Worth has just been smarter. I would like to see any evidence of anybody standing in the way of progress in Fort Worth. I am sure the media would love such a thing as well. Truth is, there is no news from, "Unless either the economy turns around or all the commercial and office space in town is full I am not going to risk much speculative building." No newspapers to sell on that. If building big buildings in Fort Worth right now made sense, you would be doing it. I know I would be.


Hyperbole; rampant hyperbole.

#16 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 15 December 2012 - 07:19 PM

To the moderator:

"It might be a good idea to move post#605-611 to the appropriate topic for this discussion"

#17 JKC

JKC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 16 December 2012 - 04:00 PM

In order to buy into the theory that there's a shadowy group keeping tall buildings out of Fort Worth, you also have to believe that this group of real estate developers (yes, they all are) is willing to turn their back on what you say is a profitable segment of their business. And that is just plain lunacy.


Or.....cite an example highrise project that was thwarted?

#18 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,425 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 16 December 2012 - 05:05 PM

Yes. Exactly.

#19 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 16 December 2012 - 08:41 PM

Or.....cite an example highrise project that was thwarted?


Or...have me prove a negative!

Perhaps this may help to provide you with a perspective that places some sunshine on how the downtown business interest works its influence. Some excerpted portions from an investigative report done and published by the Fort Worth Weekly. By the way, I keep this particular volume handy and hope that some of you do too as it is a fascinating look into runaway influence:

Fort Worth Weekly, December 22-28, 2010

….But there also appeared to be very odd lobbying poly in place. According to one council member, who asked that his name not be used, a proposed rodeo arena backed by billionaire Ed Bass was portrayed as a competing interest to the streetcar system….The argument made to me [council member] by the downtown business interests was that this project [streetcar] was too expensive and would take business out of downtown. FWW 2010


Exactly what explanation can you offer other than a weak economy when, and I emphasize, Dallas is roaring along? For my two cents, Fort Worth is nothing more than the “Biggest Town in Texas” inordinately influenced by one or two wealthy patriarchs.

#20 JKC

JKC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 16 December 2012 - 10:05 PM

Here is one reason why. Financing and market condition/size. The ability to obtain financing for new development depends upon the likelihood of success of the project in the desired location. This is measured on a number of levels but how about this: the tall office buildings that exist in the FW CBD are all in the 1,000,000 sf range (assuming we are talking about highrise office development as was originally the question). The total FW CBD class A space inventory is under 5.3 million sf. This means that a financier must believe that a new 1 million sf project will be absorbed by a market in which it will represent a 20% increase in the size of the entire current market for that product.

Conversely, the Dallas CBD only (not counting LBJ corridor, uptown, etc.) has 22.3 million sf of class A office space. Considering the current 26% mid-year vacancy rate in the Dallas CBD, that same 1 million sf project would need to be absorbed in a market in which it represents only a 6% increase in the inventory. The rents are higher and the vacancy is lower in FW but the risk is far higher as quantified by some of the metrics that concern bankers. Add CMBS standards or any other regulated financing instrument for that matter, and it becomes more difficult.

This does not mean it can't happen. There is a solution....preleasing. When an occupant of 50% or so of a planned highrise of that size walks in to FW, you may well see that next tall development. But that means attracting a large user to the FW area and the groundwork that is needed for that goes in another thread for sure.

#21 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 16 December 2012 - 11:02 PM

Here is one reason why. Financing and market condition/size. The ability to obtain financing for new development depends upon the likelihood of success of the project in the desired location....

This does not mean it can't happen..............There is a solution....preleasing. When an occupant of 50% or so of a planned highrise of that size walks in to FW, you may well see that next tall development. But that means attracting a large user to the FW area and the groundwork that is needed for that goes in another thread for sure.


I have not suggested that a new high rise be built; although if it were to happen, I would be extremely happy to know that there are some outside speculators who are not intimidated by the ploys at work in "Fort-tress Worth.

What I am suggesting is this: the existence of a power influence within the city that acts in the shadows in pursuant of its own narrow self-interest and that those kinds of actions have the effect to impede outside interests from entering into the Fort Worth market. What seems to distinguish Dallas from Fort Worth is its diverse array of builders as to oppose to the limited one or two builders in Fort Worth.

Putting Dallas aside, would you agree or not agree that Oklahoma City appropriately mirrors Fort Worth in as much as both cities are apart of the economic governing region of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank and one of the strongest if not the strongest economic region in the U.S.; that both cities are energy centers; and that Fort Worth and Oklahoma City are very close to each other in size? If you can agree in general with my comparisons, then how does or does not the OKC CBD data published by December 2012 Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce Report and written for the Milwaukee Business Journal square with the formula that you have suggested?

http://www.bizjourna...t.html?page=all


BTW I agree this topic deserves its own tread.

Keep Fort Worth folksy

#22 JKC

JKC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 17 December 2012 - 07:39 AM

My mistake then on the highrise question, I thought an assertion had been made that something was preventing them. I was simply trying to treat that subject.

OKC squares precisely, see "preleasing" above. Devon has its home there and that company has grown a great deal and Devon consolidated to become the lead user in the building. That, by the way, is exactly how FW got its' four in '80-'82.

#23 Phil Phillips

Phil Phillips

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DWG, TX

Posted 17 December 2012 - 10:07 AM

When one quotes from the Fort Worth Weekly, the argument is lost.

#24 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:55 PM

Needs its own thread.

I doubt there's a conspiracy against development, although I could easily see a lobbying effort prefering smaller downtown infill versus highrise construction. The thing that makes DTFW awesome and desirable is teh mixed use walkable nature of it. I think DTFW is nearing a tipping point as it relates to that in so much as we're about to have most of the key internal vacant lots built up and most of the older buildings renovated and occupied. To me these represent inconspicuous unused/underused inventory leaving the market. You will have a more vibrant, walkable downtown if you have smaller 100% occupied spaces than if you have the same occupied space in absolute square footage, but a much higher vacancy rate.

We should reach a point soon where there will be very few inexpensive alternatives for space, in the CBD. The overall price pressure should make high-rise construction much easier to finance, build and then quickly absorb. The block South of Sanger Lofts and the block where the XTO has it's parking lot are the two I've got my eye on. When projects are announced for those two spaces the interior will be essentially complete.

I actually think the next meaningful projects you see downtown may be parking garages. There's barely enough parking for the buildings we have. Add a million square foot building at 250 ft / FTE and you need 4,000 spaces.

#25 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:34 PM

OKC squares precisely, see "preleasing" above. Devon has its home there and that company has grown a great deal and Devon consolidated to become the lead user in the building. That, by the way, is exactly how FW got its' four in '80-'82.


On the contrary, the OKC projects seem to speak more as a counter to your main arguments concerning the formula used to determine financing and location. The speculative portion of your argument has already been one made by me and others.

A set of critical points that must be acknowledged:
1. The principle of property ownership/rights.
2. The legitimate accumulation of a large mass of property within the CBD by two groups
3. Fort Worth, in 2009 and like OKC, had in place its own Devon Energy: XTO Energy.

Therefore, so much of this argument must be and is theoretical.

The weak economy is the reason for the lack of sizeable activity in Fort Worth (FW); and that is an indisputable fact. Only a lunatic would believe otherwise.

But with economists in general agreement that both Texas and Oklahoma were far less impacted by the downturn in the national economy; and when one witnesses the dramatic growth in places like Dallas and OKC, one can began to conspire why the “finance/location formula” that has been offered is not applicable to FW, a place strategically centered in Texas/Oklahoma region? And, if one believes that these factors are at play in other places and ought to be in play in FW, then it is plain lunacy to question the “why there but not here” phenomenon. So, in theory, there lies what some label the “conspiracy”.


In response, if one is waiting for an OKC catalyst like the Devon Tower, then it is very unlikely that it will happen in FW in the foreseeable future even as the economic recovery which has been underway in Texas and Oklahoma for more than a year now and continues. Why? Because with rare exceptions, FW will remain under the ownership of one or two groups who are comfortable and doing quite well with the status quo. Why would these same FW interests risk vacancies at their current holdings? Why would they not want to protect their interests by exerting influence? Why would they build a new game changing speculative structure like the Devon Tower in OKC to destabilize a profitable market? The answer is why upset a good thing!

At the risk of sounding unappreciative of much of the restoration and beautification that has taken place, for which I am not; I instead, find myself accepting “that it is what it is”.
FW is not so much a captive of the economy as it is much more the captive of a few shrewd property landlords who with their clout, whether rightfully or wrongfully perceived by others, have effectively iced Fort Worth’s CBD.

It is hard to accept that anything of landmark status will happen in FW any time soon; I hope that I am severely wrong. It is even harder for me to accept that it is simply a weak economy that explains Fort Worth underperformance vs. other cities in the Texas and Oklahoma region; so much so, that I remain in the lunatic camp.

Keep Fort Worth folksy

#26 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:35 PM

When one quotes from the Fort Worth Weekly, the argument is lost.


Thanks for your incomparable contribution to the topic!

#27 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,833 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 17 December 2012 - 04:24 PM

Needs its own thread.

I doubt there's a conspiracy against development, although I could easily see a lobbying effort prefering smaller downtown infill versus highrise construction...I think DTFW is nearing a tipping point as it relates to that in so much as we're about to have most of the key internal vacant lots built up and most of the older buildings renovated and occupied...we should reach a point soon where there will be very few inexpensive alternatives for space, in the CBD. The overall price pressure should make high-rise construction much easier to finance, build and then quickly absorb... When projects are announced for those two spaces the interior will be essentially complete.


Welcome to the discussion.

Conspiracy or not, something or someone is lobbying for their own interests, that is for certain.

Will there ever be a time when other cities in the region will fall into a Fort Worth-like complacency; I don't think so, especially judging for what one can see currently happening in Dallas and OKC. The competing cities in our region have a tremendous headstart over FW and are already building for the future and will be already positioned to attract greater numbers of new companies into their CBD while FW, is or if ever will, fills up its infill at a far lesser pace.

Some in this discussion has described FW as being smarter than its regional competitors and that it does not take risks on things like transit or such. When the time comes, FW will build right in time; and the landrush will be on. But for right now, there is very little in FW's portfolio except "boutique" office space to wow corporate relocations to the CDB; I wish that it wasn't that way, and that a major speculative project was being added to the CBD to capitalize on the current economic recovery. With an extremely favorable occupancy rates, one would certainly think so.


As for an ideal area in the CBD that might be interesting for development, the 8-10 block area bound by Burnett, Henderson, West 10th and West 13th Streets may have potential for speculative projects and would have some immunity from the large players in the core of the CBD.

Keep Fort Worth folksy

#28 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 17 December 2012 - 05:10 PM

I would think that when major companies look to move there crps to a new cbd area they look at the popularity of the place as well as the current market in that city. With that Fort Worth should take the risk and build more and become a more modern city. I could be wrong, but if I wanted to move a large company headquarters to a location I wouldn't think of Fort Worth, why because there is no building to move into. I would go where the buildings are. Fort Worth is my home and I love it, but it needs to build.

#29 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 555 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 05:27 PM

Do you know what hurts us in getting companies to move here with white collar jobs? The name will call ourselves, Cowtown.

In fact, the local Chamber and others involved in marketing Fort Worth for business relocations have made requests for proposals to PR/AD agencies to come up with a new marketing slogan. They are considering changing the moniker of Cowntown to modernize the image as many business cut us because of the name as they think we are all cowboys and cowgirls.

If the tag line changes, look for it in the next year. I for one think it is long past overdue. One other thing that hurt us for years was the main guy who always wore Stetson hats to all the meetings with these folks--many times the meetings lasted less than the allotted time because of the cowboy attire worn by one man who refused to beleive it hurt the cities image.

#30 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,094 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 17 December 2012 - 05:42 PM

I'd agree cowtown is not the most professional or attractive name, but do business leaders really avoid any place because of a name?
There are some people who also seem to look to XTO to follow Devon's lead in OKC and consolidate into one tower, but I gotta say I really like what they are doing with historic buildings around. 700 main looks way better, the O'keefe remodal, etc all look really good. If they could do something on some of the downtown surface lots I'd be even more happy. If they don't, why not sell them to someone who will and build a garage. Either way, I'd rather welll kept historic towers than towering sleek glass ones. Plus, we aleady have 6 1/2 of those right now.

#31 ramjet

ramjet

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 589 posts
  • Location:Austin and Fort Worth

Posted 17 December 2012 - 08:01 PM

Love this discussion. And I'm torn. The collective "we" benefit from the fact that Fort Worth is a fiefdom dominated by a few benevolent billionaires who love this city (Fodor's travel guide) and ascribe to the long tradition in Fort Worth that we should strive to kick the a#@ of Dallas. For example, the opening of the addition to the Kimbell in 2013 will be international news. Much more so than the debut of the Perot Museum or the opening of Klyde Warren Park. That being said, I've never really liked the cowboys and culture thing, and was repelled by the Mayor's recent declaration (in the FW Business Press) that Fort Worth benefits from being the biggest small town in the country. In my mind, it's time for a new and much more aggressive marketing campaign for Fort Worth that distinguishes the city from the Metroplex (also not a fan of that moniker, either). Fort Worth could use more speculative development than it enjoys now. And something I've long advocated, a much more aggressive economic development strategy. I currently live in the very most desirable part of central Austin and can honestly say it does not even remotely compare to the better parts of Fort Worth, including infrastructure, shopping, transportation, etc. Yet, Austin seems to make all these widely dispersed top 10 lists. I scratch my head on how that works. Anyway, it's interesting to try to understand.

#32 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 17 December 2012 - 08:30 PM

I think there should be a mix. 40% height, 60% density. Sort of like a mini-Boston model.

All the 500ft. and taller buildings should be bound between Jones, Lancaster, Henderson, and Weatherford.

All mid-low rises (100ft.-500ft) ranging from Henderson all the way to Montgomery and in between I-30 and West 7th.

And of course you have your Trinity Uptown height ranges set up already....

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#33 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 17 December 2012 - 09:13 PM

Fort Worth is one of the bigger cities in this country and the city needs to market itself as such, I mean we always say that Fort Worth and Dallas are in compatition but there is none. I love Fort Worth and even my name on this site says how much I love Fort Worth, but as a young man in my 20's I even go to Dallas when I want to have FUN. I will take the ocational trip to Oklahoma too. There is nothing for the average everyday type person to do with out leaving the city. I would love to see Fort Worth get away from the cowtown feel and give us all a reason to not go to Sixflags, Dallas Westside, Uptown, or any of the other HIP places around the metroplex. Don't get me wrong I love Fort Worth and spend alot of time in the cultural district and downtown, but for ever one person who enjoys Fort Worth there are 4 who are like totally bored or feel out of place

#34 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 17 December 2012 - 09:19 PM

If read my post by the way you will see that there are TONS of reasons for Fort Worth to build at least 2 600ft+ buildings. You can get like 3 new Hip clubs in, and some young adult type businesses like the other cities have. I mean look at this Arlington is a freaking suburb of Fort Woth, but they have way mor tourism and are happier to be associated with Dallas which to me is NOT cool at ALL.

#35 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 17 December 2012 - 10:32 PM

If read my post by the way you will see that there are TONS of reasons for Fort Worth to build at least 2 600ft+ buildings. You can get like 3 new Hip clubs in, and some young adult type businesses like the other cities have. I mean look at this Arlington is a freaking suburb of Fort Woth, but they have way mor tourism and are happier to be associated with Dallas which to me is NOT cool at ALL.


I read it, but gave my input as well.

And it's been on my mind for a while, but I think it would be best to extend that stretch of West 7th as a huge club/bar scene district.

I'll get back to you on this tomorrow in more detail. (Also, Arlington has two major theme parks, the Rangers, and the Cowboys. You have to admit, those 4 things + the fact that it's in between Dallas and Ft. Worth give it a major boost.)

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#36 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 17 December 2012 - 11:54 PM

Jeriat you are right and I did leave alot out. West 7th would be a nice area for just but, but I mean most other cities our size have more than 1 or 2 areas for clubing and socializing.

#37 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 18 December 2012 - 12:00 AM

When one quotes from the Fort Worth Weekly, the argument is lost.


This is baseless.

#38 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 18 December 2012 - 12:13 AM


When one quotes from the Fort Worth Weekly, the argument is lost.


This is baseless.


And biased.

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#39 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 18 December 2012 - 12:16 AM

Jeriat you are right and I did leave alot out. West 7th would be a nice area for just but, but I mean most other cities our size have more than 1 or 2 areas for clubing and socializing.


- Continue to use all of Sundane Square.
- Use the old warehouses in West 7th for more clubs and social spots.
- Magnolia Ave. is starting to come along.
- And you still have the future Trinity Uptown......

I don't think I have to tell ANYONE apart of this board that there's plenty of potential in this city. It just has to be awakened.

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#40 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,094 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 18 December 2012 - 02:06 AM

Dallas is working on Fair Park being more of a year round kind of thing to. I just realized that there isn't a single water park in Fort Worth limits. Those things are everywhere in FWD as a whole.
Music scene's are important to. Look at Austin. Fort Worth's music scene revolves around Billy Bob's... Something cool and hip would go great in 7th. (Hey Jerriat, how bout those soccer stadiums eh?)

I don't see why we have to compete against Dallas, rather than work with it. D and FW are the 9th and 16gth biggest cities in the U.S. by population. When a major band goes on tour, they don't just stop in San Francisco, they stop in Oakland (or San Jose) to.

#41 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 18 December 2012 - 09:39 PM


Jeriat you are right and I did leave alot out. West 7th would be a nice area for just but, but I mean most other cities our size have more than 1 or 2 areas for clubing and socializing.


- Continue to use all of Sundane Square.
- Use the old warehouses in West 7th for more clubs and social spots.
- Magnolia Ave. is starting to come along.
- And you still have the future Trinity Uptown......

I don't think I have to tell ANYONE apart of this board that there's plenty of potential in this city. It just has to be awakened.



You are right and like I have said I do love my home city of Fort Worth, but these things should hae been done already. It is good that they are being done now however. Fort Worth should also have a more developed alternative area for the gay friendly croud. People need a reason to not drive all the to the Westend area of Dallas

#42 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 19 December 2012 - 12:55 AM



Jeriat you are right and I did leave alot out. West 7th would be a nice area for just but, but I mean most other cities our size have more than 1 or 2 areas for clubing and socializing.


- Continue to use all of Sundane Square.
- Use the old warehouses in West 7th for more clubs and social spots.
- Magnolia Ave. is starting to come along.
- And you still have the future Trinity Uptown......

I don't think I have to tell ANYONE apart of this board that there's plenty of potential in this city. It just has to be awakened.



You are right and like I have said I do love my home city of Fort Worth, but these things should hae been done already. It is good that they are being done now however. Fort Worth should also have a more developed alternative area for the gay friendly croud. People need a reason to not drive all the to the Westend area of Dallas


Pretty sure Near South is gonna be the best place for that in the future...

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#43 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 19 December 2012 - 01:03 AM

Dallas is working on Fair Park being more of a year round kind of thing to. I just realized that there isn't a single water park in Fort Worth limits. Those things are everywhere in FWD as a whole.
Music scene's are important to. Look at Austin. Fort Worth's music scene revolves around Billy Bob's... Something cool and hip would go great in 7th. (Hey Jerriat, how bout those soccer stadiums eh?)

I don't see why we have to compete against Dallas, rather than work with it. D and FW are the 9th and 16gth biggest cities in the U.S. by population. When a major band goes on tour, they don't just stop in San Francisco, they stop in Oakland (or San Jose) to.


To be fair, Fort Worth does have a bit of a hip hop (East and Southeast side) and metal (West) scene, but they're pretty small. I know Fort Worth's mainly known for its Country Western flair, but we DO have more than that.

I envision West 7th to be a major scene for the most hip and artistic types, with plenty of joints for bands and musicians to perform, to go along with the already existing Casa Manana, Fred's, and other places along that strip.

(I also see Farrington Field being renovated to hold Fort Worth's Major League Soccer team, which I will start on later this week. Austin knows what I'm talking about. :swg:)

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#44 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,913 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 19 December 2012 - 06:53 AM

CBDs and skyscrapers didn't happen by aesthetic choice. Downtowns were created for reasons of safety, security, but, most of all proximity--to courthouses, banks, major merchants, etc. Railroad terminals helped, then came the major freeway interchanges. Downtown became the transportation hub. Based on my college-era knowledge of urban economics, skyscrapers resulted because of the dual influences of density and economies of scale. Simply put, when you have a small space, it's cheaper to build up then out. I believe, however, that in the modern era of telecommunications and the internet, proximity may be less a factor. You don't need to office close to the courthouse anymore. And you certainly don't need to shop or bank downtown as much as you used to. But now more people are actually living downtown, so I guess they prefer a friendlier environment. Ergo, the aesthetic choice to scale down and be pedestrian-oriented.

#45 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:19 AM

I get that, but skyscrapers also define a city. When the Landmark tower was demolished that put a hole in the Fort Worth skyline. If anything else get that spot replaced and she skyline would look better. People that know nothing about this city will look at the skyline and think that there is nothing here. You all seem to forget that the average person today does not do their homework so they will not know that this is actually a major city just by the looks. In stead they will go east to Dallas. I remember when I was in high-school and people used to tell me that I need to leave this place as fast as I can because Fort Worth is nothing and that there are a lot of better cities and schools to go to. I would ask why and they would point to downtown, lol, I laugh about it today

#46 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:26 AM


Dallas is working on Fair Park being more of a year round kind of thing to. I just realized that there isn't a single water park in Fort Worth limits. Those things are everywhere in FWD as a whole.
Music scene's are important to. Look at Austin. Fort Worth's music scene revolves around Billy Bob's... Something cool and hip would go great in 7th. (Hey Jerriat, how bout those soccer stadiums eh?)

I don't see why we have to compete against Dallas, rather than work with it. D and FW are the 9th and 16gth biggest cities in the U.S. by population. When a major band goes on tour, they don't just stop in San Francisco, they stop in Oakland (or San Jose) to.


To be fair, Fort Worth does have a bit of a hip hop (East and Southeast side) and metal (West) scene, but they're pretty small. I know Fort Worth's mainly known for its Country Western flair, but we DO have more than that.

I envision West 7th to be a major scene for the most hip and artistic types, with plenty of joints for bands and musicians to perform, to go along with the already existing Casa Manana, Fred's, and other places along that strip.

(I also see Farrington Field being renovated to hold Fort Worth's Major League Soccer team, which I will start on later this week. Austin knows what I'm talking about. :swg:)



Wow the east and southeast sides of the city happen to be some of the parts of the city that need to be renovated the most and really not good places to put up nicer hip-hop clubs, sorry not cool. Maybe if the city fix up the streets and find a way to level some of the housing and apartments that are lets say more than just ghetto. Thats why I and most of my friends leave the area for clubbing. Who wants to go to a hole in the wall jupjoint. I know we can something hip-hop and r&b downtown or on West 7th.

#47 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:33 AM

I believe, however, that in the modern era of telecommunications and the internet, proximity may be less a factor. You don't need to office close to the courthouse anymore. And you certainly don't need to shop or bank downtown as much as you used to.


I actually disagree with this. Well, I don't know if I disagree with it as much as I still think proximity is a huge factor. In fact, I'm getting ready to buy a building and relocate my company very close to downtown in large part to be close to my bankers, lawyers, and other professionals as well as public transportation and the city center (I'm not ready to share the architectural details yet, but I promise that I will).

Technology requirements actually played a big role in our decision on where to locate. We use a data center in Irving and needed bandwidth and power security at our offices as well as access to IT talent. Irving actually would have been a good place for all those technology things, but I'm not driving to Irving every day. DTFW provides those things in a way that some of the FW subs can't. Plus, Irving didn't have all the banking and professional support I need.

Ultimately I think the cheap housing built in the periphery inevitably becoming the slums of the future combined with a growing push to cut down on commuting will cause a real resurgence in downtown business centers. Suburban sprawl has been 60+ years in the making and will take about as long to undo, but I think that's the ultimate conclusion. Up will come back into vogue, but probably in conjunction with more pedestrian friendly, non-commuting oriented development. I don't see FW ever having the skyscraper canyons of Manhattan.

#48 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,913 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:52 AM

Good points, and other factors have been mentioned, such as pride in a downtown and money to spend. If you're a billion-dollar energy production company and want the world to know it, such as Devon, you build a very high-rise tower. And, look at the mega towers in Dubai...population density and land scarcity hardly figures in there. Gotta be the work of a very rich oil magnat with a swelled head. BUT, the over-populated and land-scarce city of Tokyo had no choice but to build up.

#49 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,425 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:55 AM

People need a reason to not drive all the to the Westend area of Dallas


1992 called and they want this comment back. Seriously, the West End is a ghost town. My wife and I ate at a restaurant there before a concert at the AAC this summer on a Saturday night and there was no one there. Literally.

#50 prideftw

prideftw

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:men, reading, music, and development

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:58 AM


People need a reason to not drive all the to the Westend area of Dallas


1992 called and they want this comment back. Seriously, the West End is a ghost town. My wife and I ate at a restaurant there before a concert at the AAC this summer on a Saturday night and there was no one there. Literally.


When I say the westend I am talking about Cedersprings. Which is busy every night. All of the Gay bars are over there dude. So what ever




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users