[normanfd]

Wal-Mart is seeking zoning changes to allow a 39,600 square foot Neighborhood Market on West Vickery behind Ridglea Hills Elementary School. The company is also seeking a variance to allow beer and wine sales despite the close proximity of the school. The description of the site sounds like it is at the location of the old horse barn near Southwest Blvd. that used to have the red roof with "Arabian Studs" painted in white. Here's the link:

http://www.dfw.com/m...cal/8412805.htm

The store is, understandably, quite controversial in the neighborhood.

Pamipoo, you live in my old stomping grounds. What are your views?

[Dismuke]

I look forward to it. While it is not especially close to where I live, it would still be the closest 24 hour grocery store for me to drive to - and it will have decent prices as well. In fact, its existence might just put pressure on one of the less capable supermarket chains such as Albertsons or Safeway to keep one of their West Side stores open 24 hours. The fact that a person on the West Side - one of the more urbane areas of a major American city - currently has to drive all the way to either I-20 and Hulen or to Lake Worth in order to find a grocery store in the middle of the night is something which drives me nuts and is quite remarkable when you really think about it.

[salvag]

Naw, It'll be a day in hell before I shop at any "roy pope" grocery store and pay higher prices. I think Wal-Mart is great for the community. So they might close down a few mom and pop stores, but I really don't care because I'm getting cheaper prices on food. It's a sacrifice worth giving.

Wal-Mart generates tons of tax money for the city, and they also donate thousands of dollars to local charaties and organizations. I think the people of Ridglea Hills need to chill out and realize that this Wal-Mart is going to have no negative effect whatsoever to their community. It's not going to promote crime for goodness sake. It's open 24 hours and they have security outside with about 40 cameras outside the building. They are even going to put a 8 foot high fence around the whole backside of the building. The Wal-Mart would not even be on the same level as the school. The roof of the Wal-Mart would be at ground level of the school.

It's rediculious that the Ridlea Hills area is making such a fuss over nothing. This grocery store is going to be good for the community and that is all that matters.

My Lord, Wal-Mart has even offered to adopt that school and buy them computers and donate money and so much more!!!!!

Get real people and realize that just because this is a Wal-Mart, and just because it is close to a school, it doesn't automatically make it a bad thing!!!!!

[salvag]

There will not be a thur street into the neighborhood.

I also try to avoid Vickery as much as posible for the same reasons as you. It's trashy, simply put.

But if we don't start getting some new development on that street, it will remain trashy for years to come.

This Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market could actually promote some nice retailers onto that street and start some redevopment of that ugly stretch.

And yes, the Wal-Mart WILL be a huge improvment to what is currently there: vacant ugly land. Atleast there will be some nice landscaping done around that block if it is develpoed. I even have found Wal-Mart's Neighorhood Market's stone architecture in other cities to be pretty attractive.

This is a good thing no two ways about it.

[JBB]

Not that I'm in the business of defending Wal Mart, but I've heard of several instances of them giving money back to schools in the community. One of my relatives was a principal at a school where the manager of the local Wal Mart (which was actually in a different school district) would agree to match the money that they made from their annual fundraising auction.

[mosteijn]

The convenience is undoubtedly desireable. My only problem is the design. If they can minimalize the parking area (this is supposed to be local, maybe some of them can walk?) and customize the store building then I guess I'm ok with it. At least it isn't a full-fledged supercenter...ugh. I won't comment on the school issue b/c I really don't know much about Wal-Mart other then it builds generic supercenter suburban stores with a sea of parking.

About Vickery...I don't think its that bad. The part between Southwest Blvd and Bryant Irvin is alright, since the C.C. and some other nice housing are on either side and the tracks aren't very wide. But how nice can you expect the segment between B.I. and Hulen to be since it parallels a railyard??? My only suggestion is to put up some tall bushes or trees to buffer the road from the sounds and sights of the trains. The Como area all together isn't too nice, but I expect it to get better someday since it's borded on almost all sides by nice neigborhoods.

[salvag]

I like that Fort Worth has "local flavor"..... but I'd rather see a Wal-Mart grocery store be built there than nothing at all.

My arguement is that it is not going to hurt anything. It's better than there being a piece of vacant land there for years to come.

Let's face it, either a grocery store is going to be built at that site, or nothing at all. I doubt any developer would build houses there like the neighborhood wants seeing as it is right across from the railroad tracks.

Also Fort Worth is in desperate need of more 24 hour grocery stores. I see this as a huge plus.

[Buck]

Surely nobody is suggesting that a vacant lot is better than a grocery store.

I hate Wal-Mart, but I'd still prefer a grocery to nothing. And there is no convenient grocery serving that neighborhood until you go up to Camp Bowie.

[normanfd]

Really, Buck? There are no longer any convenience stores in the neighborhood? I remember there used to be one on the west side of Southwest Blvd. in the area where Marks Place, Piedmont Road, and Rothington Road intersect the boulevard. What is there now?

[salvag]

I live 1 minute from the site in question and the only convenience store that I know of is My-T Mart which is off of the Crosslands exit on Southwest Blvd.

But still that is a CONVENIENCE store... not a full grocery store. It is true that if you want a full grocery store you either have to go to Camp Bowie or Bryant Irvin.

There are no grocery stores in that general area of Vickery and Southwest Blvd.

[normanfd]

Okay, because at the location I described, there used to be a convenience store called the Stop N Go. From where I used to live on Piedmont Rd., you left the neighborhood either passing that store on the south or from the north leaving via Floyd Dr. by the Buddies/Winn Dixie/Kroger store at the Camp Bowie/CB West Y intersection.

So what is now located at that location?

[Thurman52]

I took an opportunity Saturday to drive by the proposed location. The location makes sound economic sense for Wal Mart b/c there is no nearby stores and space in the area limited so future competion is limited.

The lot is bigger than I thought it would be and we are lucky they did not try to cram a Super Center at that location.

The bluff is significant and direct impact to the neighborhood is minor. I hate to disagree but I think it is a good project.

[salvag]

normanfd, on Apr 20 2004, 01:04 AM, said:

So what is now located at that location?

There is a small Texaco gas station off of Southwest Blvd. at that approximate location that you are describing. I don't remember it ever being a Stop N Go but it could have been at one time.

It is a very, very small convenience store, and the prices are so high that it makes no sense to buy there.

[mosteijn]

Has Wal-Mart built any other of these grocery/convenient stores before? I haven't ever heard of this type of store, but it's a way better alternative than their full sized supercenters.

[salvag]

Yes, they have built quite a few of the "Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market" stores. It is a fairly new Wal-Mart concept and has only been around for a few years. The only one close to here that I know of is in North Richland Hills. Although, I've heard there are many more in the metroplex.

It's nice to be able to get the cheaper food on groceries without actually going to a full Supercenter.

[pmburk]

Well, the City Council approved rezoning of the area in yesterday's meeting by a 6-1 vote, even though several members of the RHNA showed up to oppose. In all honesty, I'm pretty much apathetic about the issue at this point. I can see the reasons why residents don't want a Wal-Mart, but I can also see where it could potentially be a good thing. They did reiterate (during the rezoning discussion) that Angus will not be opened up to Vickery, so there won't be a thru street into Ridglea Hills, which is a plus. I think if the project does go through, it probably won't impact the neighborhood as negatively as many think, especially because of the bluff separating the areas and the fact that there won't be any thru streets. I'm still not thrilled about the idea of living next to a Wal-Mart, but at least it won't be technically *in* my neighborhood.

[salvag]

I'm glad to hear it went through. It will be very convenient for me to shop there.

[Akuhead]

I'm glad the rezoning passed too. I was afraid it wouldn't after seeing the level of opposition in the neighborhood association's poll on the matter. Their arguments against Wal-Mart seemed to me to be more emotional than logical, though.

There's a very attractive Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market on Basswood Blvd. in the Fossil Creek area of North Fort Worth. I think one would really spruce up the area adjacent to Ridglea Hills. Just my 2¢ for whatever they're worth.

[Buck]

The Comprehensive Plan is the work of a few people -- mostly neighborhood activists -- not some shared citywide vision.

If the Plan conflicts with good sense, I think our elected council's judgment is better than the pie-in-the-sky plan.

And who would build a house on that corner, anyway? Vickery and 820 doesn't look like single-family zoning to me.

Bring on the retail!

[mosteijn]

Buck, on May 13 2004, 05:23 PM, said:

And who would build a house on that corner, anyway? Vickery and 820 doesn't look like single-family zoning to me.

Bring on the retail!

Well, technically it's Vickery and 183, right before the freeway part ends, but I do agree that a house would be out of place on that intersection. I guess I don't mind it, I won't be shopping there, but I still hope it isn't ugly. The area of town surrounding it north of 183 just doesn't deserve an ugly suburban Wal-Mart, and I hope the neighborhood organizations at least manage to get them to design something worthwhile.

[Buck]

Oops. You're right -- Vickery and 183.

But it's only a grocery store.

I don't think it's fair to raise concerns about an "ugly suburban Wal-Mart."

As far as the validity of the Comprehensive Plan -- we could conduct a Forum survey to see how many posters here went to any of those meetings.

I'm not knocking the hard work of those few involved.

But it's a plan, not a binding set of rules. In this case, it is difficult to see why the plan called for single-family zoning at a major intersection with retail potential.

[salvag]

I'm with you all the way on this one, Buck.

This isn't the first time the Ridglea Hills neighborhood has thrown a fit over that property. I remember a few years back a developer was trying to build a shopping center there with a Tom Thumb grocery store. If you think they are making a fuss this time, imagine what it was like then.

It is unfair for the neighborhood to automatically say that this development will promote crime, because there is no proof at all to that claim. Another big objection they are using is that the Wal-Mart is going to ask for a variance to allow liquor sales next to the school.... SO WHAT?!?! Is selling liquor there going to bring in some kind of seedy crowd i.e. street bums and criminals? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Another stupid argument is that there will be a gas station on the lot that "may not be run by Wal-Mart". OH NO!! Not a gas station! Oh please! The horror!

No developer is going to build single family housing at that site, ever. I'm willing to bet money on that. The PROPOSED town homes by that property are much further back than the property facing Vickery.

If there ever was a developer to build any kind of NEW housing facing Vickery (I'm not including the 40 year old country club houses) it would most likely be low income, and then we'd go through this same mess again with Ridglea Hills griping that they don't want low income housing there.

Another utterly rediculious argument is that "Removing Trees for Large Flat Commercial Lot Makes School More Obvious From Southwest Blvd." Oh no! You'll be able to see the school from the street! NO! PLEASE SAY IT AIN'T SO! If they don't want the school visible from the street, maybe they should have just buried it underground.

There's going to be a fence across the whole back of the property, trust me on this. And with the amount of lighting, security cameras, and hired security guards that will be at the Wal-Mart, crime will, if anything, decrease.

This whole thing frustrates me to no end. I can't stand how these people like to make big deals out of something when honestly there is nothing to be concerned about. The neighorhood is trying to come up with every little possible thing that could be a negative so they can get their way. I'm sick of it.

They are only concerned about themselves, and don't care about the impact a grocery store would have to that area. We need a grocery store in that part of town, and that site is as good as any. I'm sick of driving all the way to Camp Bowie!!

Ok, I'm done ranting.

[mosteijn]

salvag, on May 14 2004, 11:24 AM, said:

If there ever was a developer to build any kind of NEW housing facing Vickery (I'm not including the 40 year old country club houses) it would most likely be low income, and then we'd go through this same mess again with Ridglea Hills griping that they don't want low income housing there.

What about that semi-new development with the curved brick walls halfway between BI and 183 (forgot the name)? I went to a halloween party there once and the houses were definately not low income, and all the neighborhoods surrounding Vickery on that segment, even past the RR tracks, are also nice areas of town. I would understand the opposition to low income housing, it just doesn't fit there. Why do people have such a negative image of Vickery?

And that's why I hope it's designed well, because it's not an ugly area and an ugly suburban eyesore wouldn't reflect that. Don't get me wrong, I really hope the area gets the added convenience and I don't think there are any valid oppositions raised by the Ridglea Hills organization, other than it should be designed to fit the neighborhood.

[salvag]

Jonnyrules23, on May 14 2004, 09:20 PM, said:

Why do people have such a negative image of Vickery?

There is such a negative image of Vickery because quite frankly the majority of it is trashy and run down. Of course that doesn't include the little stretch with the curved brick wall and semi-new housing.

But that curved brick wall is so small compared to the whole stretch of Vickery. I drive down that street a lot, and it's an awful eyesore.

Vickery motel, abandoned buildings, old warehouses, ugly retail strip centers from the 50s and 60s that are in utter disrepair, no landscaping, rail road tracks with weeds growing 10 feet tall, did I mention abandoned buildings?

These are just a few of the problems with Vickery, and why I am all for any new development we can get to spruce up that IMHO hideous road.

[JBB]

Hey, Vickery might look like a war zone in the end, but there will be some killer suburban, pre-cast concrete construction shopping centers along that tollway we don't need.

[Buck]

Vickery has always been an industrial street with some neighborhood commercial businesses.

The tollway is knocking out the south side of the road and a lot of the industrial junk. The neighborhood commercial is on the north side.

As long as it's grade level -- no huge wall along Vickery -- I think it'll be an improvement most of the way.

If the tollway drivers can see the shops on the north side of the road, that might even help give visibility to those little places like Don Felipe's or Swiss Pastry Shop.

Either way, that's a couple of miles from the grocery store at 183.

[mosteijn]

A few things about Vickery:

Like salvag said, there are tons of old abondoned warehouses and commerical buildings. I think this makes them prime targets for redevelopment into lofts or offices and I wonder why the city hasn't targeted them, in fact the whole area around Vickery and Montgomery, for redevelopment. IMO, it would make a fantastic urban village.

And about the tollway ruining the street: as I understand it, the SW Parkway will NOT have frontage roads. This makes any kind of commerical development along the tollway a poor investment for developers, as there will be no easy way to access them. A lot of the vacant land surrounding the freeway, inside loop 820, has been requested to be rezoned to MU2, which doesn't sound like suburban strip malls to me. And like Buck said, it will take out a huge chunk of crappy industry between Vickery and the UP switchyards, replacing it with an extensively landscaped and buffered toll plaza.

Something should be done about the stretch through Como, it's really the only stretch of Vickery that doesn't have much hope right now. But it's a relatively small stretch, and I think if the neighborhood pulled together, they could easily launch a not-too-dramatic revival effort. That's all it needs, just a lil bit of TLC.

[mosteijn]

I drove by the corner of Vickery and 183 this afternoon, and saw that the developers of the townhomes have put up a sign, but I didn't have time to read it. I think it had a picture on it, though. Townhomes will definately work better on that site than single family homes. I wonder if they'll be right up next to Vickery, like the Ridglea Place townhomes (which are very nicely designed btw, I was just looking at their website)

[salvag]

The townhomes will not have Vickery as a border, only 183.

Also, the Ridglea Place townhomes you speak of do not have Vickery as a border either. They are closer to Camp Bowie than Vickery.

[mosteijn]

I meant like the Ridglea Place townhomes are right up next to Westridge, they give a very urban feel to the street (the lack of fencing helps). But if they don't front Vickery at all, I guess that's not going to happen. That makes me wonder, what is going on the corner of 183 and Vickery? The Wal-Mart is being built a little further up the road on Vickery, right?

[salvag]

This will give you an idea of how the land is going to be laid out at the corner of Vickery and 183.

http://www.ridgleahills.com/images/mar%202...20sw%20blvd.pdf

[mosteijn]

Oh, I guess the Wal-Mart lot is at the corner. And I thought it said somewhere that gas pumps wouldn't be a part of the development. Or did I misread?

[salvag]

The people who are against the Wal-Mart development don't want the gas pumps there for unknown reason.

I believe that if the Wal-Mart is constructed that the gas pumps will be a part of it, which is fine by me.

[Thurman52]

I believe I read the development on SW Blvd was R2 zoning, and did not border Vickery.

[salvag]

Does anyone know how the city council voted today on the zoning change?

[John T Roberts]

The council hasn't voted yet. The second Tuesday of the month is another night meeting. There's still time for you to attend, since the meeting doesn't start until 7:00 PM.

[mosteijn]

It appears the store's gonna be built. Article:

http://www.dfw.com/m...cal/9150476.htm

I think the papar had a picture of the proposed store, could anyone scan it if possible?

[Thurman52]

After all that fighting and many months have passed since the hearing, I figured construction would be well under way. I drove by last week to see how it looks, and nothing, nothing had been done.. No signs, no clearing of land.

Did the fighting scare Wal-Mart off? What gives?