Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Waterside (LMRA property being developed by Trademark)

Southwest FW LMRA

  • Please log in to reply
140 replies to this topic

#1 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 675 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 16 May 2013 - 12:40 PM

http://fwbusinesspre...evelopment.aspx

 

Name on Trademark's website says Water Place so the article might be inaccurate.  Hopefully this one goes better than their Westbend development has.



#2 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 556 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 08:06 AM

Waterside Development coming in 2015 on the near southwest side.

 

 

Waterside, a new 63-acre master planned mixed-use development, is located on the Trinity River at Bryant Irvin Road and Arborlawn Drive and includes property formerly owned by Lockheed Martin Recreation Association and purchased by Trademark earlier this spring.

 

 

Terry Montesi, Chairman  and CEO of Trademark, will present to the  FW Chamber membership a luncheon on Thursday, August 29, 2013 with the details of the new development.  Montesi founded Trademark in 1992 and has since developed or invested in over $1.45 billion in retail and mixed-use properties.

 

 

Waterside will be a walkable shopping, leisure, office, hotel and residential district with an unmatched amenity package including a new extension of the Trinity Trails. The project will feature a new trailhead, riverside restaurants, a large multi-purpose central plaza with trees, a dog park, a riverfront amphitheater and over 1.5 miles of Trinity River frontage.


#3 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 08 August 2013 - 12:31 PM

 

"insertsweetsoundingnamehere" will be a walkable shopping, leisure, office, hotel and residential district .."

 

 

 

Gee, how many of these do we have or are planned in FW right now?  Given the short attention span of residents to patronize the latest restaurants, don't these dilute the developments in the more established areas?  (i.e. several along 7th, Magnolia, other southside areas).



#4 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,207 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 08 August 2013 - 02:30 PM

I'm also a little worried about an oversaturation of urban developments. With so many of them, I have to imagine demand will be stretched thin.

 

Waterside is going to be very close to Clearfork, just on the other side of the river and new parkway under construction.


- Dylan


#5 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,918 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 09 August 2013 - 06:48 AM

Fort Worthians may have expressed similar concerns about over-saturation when Hulen Mall and Ridgmar Mall were proposed long ago,  but that didn't stop further economic development of those areas.  What harms a project is not necessarily over-saturation but some adverse event that creates a market distortion.  An economic recession, for example.  Or the collapse of the savings and loan industry back in the 1980s.  What harmed Ridgmar Mall for awhile back about 20 years ago, in my anecdotal opinion, was the significant impact of the Carswell AFB closure that affected the whole northwest quadrant of Tarrant County.  But Fort Worth is now in an economic boom for a variety of reasons and I think what we're seeing is a market response to it and not over-saturation (at least I hope it isn't).



#6 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 346 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 09 August 2013 - 07:26 AM

Fort Worthians may have expressed similar concerns about over-saturation when Hulen Mall and Ridgmar Mall were proposed long ago,  but that didn't stop further economic development of those areas.  What harms a project is not necessarily over-saturation but some adverse event that creates a market distortion.  An economic recession, for example.  Or the collapse of the savings and loan industry back in the 1980s.  What harmed Ridgmar Mall for awhile back about 20 years ago, in my anecdotal opinion, was the significant impact of the Carswell AFB closure that affected the whole northwest quadrant of Tarrant County.  But Fort Worth is now in an economic boom for a variety of reasons and I think what we're seeing is a market response to it and not over-saturation (at least I hope it isn't).


I think there is also something to be said about the fact that since these projects are mixed use (including residential) they are, to a certain extent, bringing with them there own internal demand and are better suited to being in close proximity to one another without necessarily harming one another, which makes them more resilient than, say, a power center next to the latest pop-up exurb.

#7 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 09 August 2013 - 08:53 AM

I talked to someone involved with Cypress yesterday.  He said the problem with all the mixed use stuff is that it doesn't fill at the same rate.  We were talking about West 7th, but he said more generally what we're seeing there (over flowing with residents, not enough businesses) is a problem in almost all mixed use developments.  Not that they won't fill the groundfloor retail, but it takes longer.  So, the additional space filling out West 7th doesn't include groundfloor retail.  I wonder, then, if the additional mixed use developments will be patient enough to include ground floor retail in the planning.



#8 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 09 August 2013 - 12:23 PM

Haven't all of the new little urban-y districts had some sort of bankruptcy, foreclosure and new ownership?  There seems to be a lot of vacancies.



#9 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 675 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 09 August 2013 - 04:54 PM

Haven't all of the new little urban-y districts had some sort of bankruptcy, foreclosure and new ownership?  There seems to be a lot of vacancies.

 

It's pretty natural to have local restaurants and retail churn a little until people find out what works.  As far as the developments themselves (West 7th, Museum Place, etc.) I think it's fair to say that given the timing of build-out which was during the downturn, they are all doing quite well.  Someone from Carlyle told me in 2010 that West 7th was their best performing property nationwide at that point in time (Carlyle is the money behind that development). 

 

Clearly the multi-family rental aspect has been the strongest in these new developments, but if the retail and restaurants didn't exist, the multi-family wouldn't be as attractive...so the mixed use aspect might not be totally even at the beginning, but it's a necessity for any of it to work.  I really don't think the new Museum Place apartments would be 85% leased at those rates if residents didn't have Blue and Eddie V's (and the upcoming places within the new building) within a block's walk.  That said, the ones that appear to be really killing it are those that bought the land behind West 7th and are piggybacking on the West 7th vibe with apartments that don't have a mixed use component but are still within walking distance of stuff that does.



#10 ramjet

ramjet

    Elite Member

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

Posted 09 August 2013 - 05:11 PM

 

Haven't all of the new little urban-y districts had some sort of bankruptcy, foreclosure and new ownership?  There seems to be a lot of vacancies.

 

It's pretty natural to have local restaurants and retail churn a little until people find out what works.  As far as the developments themselves (West 7th, Museum Place, etc.) I think it's fair to say that given the timing of build-out which was during the downtown, they are all doing quite well.  Someone from Carlyle told me in 2010 that West 7th was their best performing property nationwide at that point in time (Carlyle is the money behind that development). 

 

Clearly the multi-family rental aspect has been the strongest in these new developments, but if the retail and restaurants didn't exist, the multi-family wouldn't be as attractive...so the mixed use aspect might not be totally even at the beginning, but it's a necessity for any of it to work.  I really don't think the new Museum Place apartments would be 85% leased at those rates if residents didn't have Blue and Eddie V's (and the upcoming places within the new building) within a block's walk.  That said, the ones that appear to be really killing it are those that bought the land behind West 7th and are piggybacking on the West 7th vibe with apartments that don't have a mixed use component but are still within walking distance of stuff that does.

 

There's all kinds of literature out there that describe how younger generations are leaving the suburbs behind and moving into the central core of cities.  I think these developments are responding to the market of the 2010's.  If you are familiar with Austin, there are currently 5 new multi-use developments under construction within a mile of the Barton Springs and Lamar intersection.  This is in addition to four that are already built in that same area.  I wouldn't worry too much about turnover in retail in these developments.  We've seen that a lot here in Austin, too.  But there always seems to be another entrepreneur in the wings wanting to try something new.  The market in Fort Worth appears to be similar these days.  I think Fort Worthians are just not as used to that kind of frenetic economic activity.  It's a good thing!  Get out there and check 'em out!



#11 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 12 August 2013 - 04:21 PM

 

Haven't all of the new little urban-y districts had some sort of bankruptcy, foreclosure and new ownership?  There seems to be a lot of vacancies.

That said, the ones that appear to be really killing it are those that bought the land behind West 7th and are piggybacking on the West 7th vibe with apartments that don't have a mixed use component but are still within walking distance of stuff that does.

 

 

If you mean those "Buffalo-whatever" apartments by Rodeo Goat, I think that it's fine to have "apartment buildings" that don't have retail below (real cities have them too).

 

So, will Waterside be right next to ClearForkMainStreet?

 

I still think that we have enough little insta-villages for the moment.  Let's get them filled in with people and things to do...



#12 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,119 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 23 August 2013 - 01:50 PM

http://www.trademark...erty/waterside/

 

prop_waterside011.jpg



#13 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 23 August 2013 - 10:29 PM

Aren't they taking some artistic liberty with the look of the "river?"

 

All that stuff could fill-in existing developments around 7th, UPV, and the aborted development near Zoe's/Smashburger/Fred's Bait Shack on the trail...



#14 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 24 August 2013 - 12:39 AM

Aren't they taking some artistic liberty with the look of the "river?"

 

All that stuff could fill-in existing developments around 7th, UPV, and the aborted development near Zoe's/Smashburger/Fred's Bait Shack on the trail...

 

UPV? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#15 dfwerdoc

dfwerdoc

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 176 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:fort worth
  • Interests:hockey, cars, architecture, photography, everything and anything apple, medicine.

Posted 24 August 2013 - 01:40 AM

university park village development 



#16 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

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

Posted 24 August 2013 - 02:04 PM

I agree that the illustration provided is a little heavy on the creative marketing aspect and less so on the most likely scenario. It looks very green and lots of water… where is all that water needed to maintain the look going to come from? Maybe this will be the first development to build an underground cistern to capture and store runoff from the roofs and paved areas for use as irrigation water later. Are all the old trees on the site going to be bulldozed so the little "designer trees" shown can dominate? I can't help but think that unless some of these proposed developments along the river get smart and plan for the climate we live in and are likely to live in in the future, that the "Lake Granbury Look" is going to be more common than many light like.



#17 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 29 August 2013 - 07:57 AM

Missed opportunity to do something really great.


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#18 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:05 AM

Missed opportunity to do something really great.

 

What'd ya have in mind? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#19 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:21 AM

 

Missed opportunity to do something really great.

 

What'd ya have in mind? 

 

 

Something more forward-thinking than "fancied-up strip mall/big box/pad sites/parking lots with some adjacent housing."  I guess one could make the point that just having the adjacent housing *is* forward thinking compared to most of the junk that is virtually all of Bryant Irvin and Hulen, but...eh, whatever.  I am bitter and curmudgeonly about development here nowadays in most of the city, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#20 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,918 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 29 August 2013 - 09:24 AM

So, coming from a lawyer who dabbles in real estate now and then, when I read dissatisfaction about drab-looking projects ("strip mall/big box/pad sites/parking lots with some adjacent housing"), not only Waterside, but a lot of other projects in and around Fort Worth, then I ask, who's fault is it?  Not the fault of imaginative and creative architects like Jeriat, I would guess. So does it mean that developers lack creativity and imagination and don't hire those kind of architects for their projects?



#21 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,437 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 29 August 2013 - 10:00 AM

Land in FW is cheap and plentiful.  There's not a lot of short term financial benefit to creative, sustainable development.



#22 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 04 December 2013 - 07:53 PM

Council delayed their vote another week. The river park residents and Overton woods residents are up in arms about the apartments and no site plan

#23 FarSouth

FarSouth

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Location:Far South

Posted 13 December 2013 - 11:45 AM

I wonder how hard will it be to find retail to fill this development and the Clearfork development.



#24 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 14 December 2013 - 08:59 AM

I personally think we are over-retailed.  It seems that we have so many vacant retail spaces.  Why don't we try to fill those first before we start building new?



#25 mmiller2002

mmiller2002

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Hi Mounttttt
  • Interests:Born 1959
    HS Grad 1977
    1982 BSEE Penn State

Posted 16 December 2013 - 12:35 PM

I agree.  But it goes on because some development company can make money creating a project and selling investors on the idea.  Construction companies make money building, creating jobs.  Even if it sits vacant, a lot of people make money up-front.



#26 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,437 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 18 December 2013 - 10:18 PM

WFAA is reporting that Whole Foods is committed to this development.  It sounds like it's far from a done deal and they had nothing official from either Whole Foods or the developer.



#27 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 675 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 19 December 2013 - 04:32 PM

WFAA is reporting that Whole Foods is committed to this development.  It sounds like it's far from a done deal and they had nothing official from either Whole Foods or the developer.

 

So Whole Foods rumors are now associated with 4 different developments?  I can't imagine the kind of rent concessions they'll be getting.



#28 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 19 December 2013 - 08:04 PM

 

WFAA is reporting that Whole Foods is committed to this development.  It sounds like it's far from a done deal and they had nothing official from either Whole Foods or the developer.

 

So Whole Foods rumors are now associated with 4 different developments?  I can't imagine the kind of rent concessions they'll be getting.

 

 

4? 

Ok. I know it's this and Left Bank. 

What are the other two? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#29 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,437 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 19 December 2013 - 09:17 PM

Clearfork and West Bend

#30 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 20 December 2013 - 06:41 PM

Village on camp Bowie too

#31 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,119 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 18 February 2014 - 06:25 PM

Seems like this is the thing to do lately. 

 

ST: Developer seeks $18.5 million in incentives for Waterside project



#32 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,437 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 18 February 2014 - 07:15 PM

Lately? Short memory or too young to remember that FW has had their hand out to developers for more than the last decade?

#33 mmmdan

mmmdan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 209 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ridglea Hills

Posted 19 February 2014 - 07:40 AM

But we better kill the streetcar because that would just be a handout to developers.



#34 elpingüino

elpingüino

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 304 posts

Posted 29 April 2014 - 10:59 AM

Waterside lands Whole Foods: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/04/29/5776629/whole-foods-plans-first-fort-worth.html 



#35 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 675 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 29 April 2014 - 02:35 PM

Good for Trademark.  That store will immediately take a lot of Southwest FW market share.

 

I'm hoping that Whole Foods will view that location as being far enough away from W. 7th that they consider dropping Fort Worth store #2 into the Left Bank development.  Seems like those two locations would serve two very different markets while both being near high-end demographics.



#36 Volare

Volare

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,188 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakhurst, Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:running, cycling, geocaching, photography, gardening, hunting, fishing...

Posted 30 April 2014 - 12:45 PM

So now we will have the sole Fort Worth locations for Sprouts, Central Market, Trader Joes and Whole Foods all within about 5 miles of each other. While the rest of Fort Worth gets jack squat. Awesome.



#37 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 30 April 2014 - 08:21 PM

I don't know if you took a look at the Site Plan and the Leasing Package, but here are the links.

 

Site Plan

 

Leasing Package



#38 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 01 May 2014 - 07:59 AM

"Walkable mixed-use development" - technically, only in its internal sense.  It isn't "walkable" outside of itself - it's a typical strip mall complex that just happens to have apartments behind it, but which does not connect to anything else or try to build some kind of public space context outside its own borders.  What a corruption of the term "walkable."


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#39 hannerhan

hannerhan

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 675 posts
  • Location:Ft Worth

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:22 AM

"Walkable mixed-use development" - technically, only in its internal sense.  It isn't "walkable" outside of itself - it's a typical strip mall complex that just happens to have apartments behind it, but which does not connect to anything else or try to build some kind of public space context outside its own borders.  What a corruption of the term "walkable."

 

I don't feel quite that strongly, but yeah it's really not great.  I don't understand why they wouldn't at least try to stack residential on top of the retail like West 7th, to give it a more urban vibe and increase the interaction.



#40 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 346 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:55 AM

"Walkable mixed-use development" - technically, only in its internal sense.  It isn't "walkable" outside of itself - it's a typical strip mall complex that just happens to have apartments behind it, but which does not connect to anything else or try to build some kind of public space context outside its own borders.  What a corruption of the term "walkable."

 

 

It's like I tend to tell people... you can pick out a good or bad development pretty easily by looking at the edges. A good/great single development that is capable of standing the test of time (regardless of its size or use) will tend to provide a strong opportunity for inviting other good development around it in a way that allows the two (or more) developments to blend fairly seemlessly with one another creating not one singular development, but a neighborhood.

 

West 7th and Museum Place are great examples of exactly this (in many ways this was a consequence of the location - the street grid was already there), and we are already seeing how other projects not by the original developer have been able to take place around it in a way that expands the original project into something bigger, something more complicated, something more exciting and something that is more likely to be able to adapt over time and respond to changes in the market without having to level all of the buildings and start again from scratch. In other words, what has been created is a neighborhood - when people refer to W7 nowadays, they are no longer refering only to the Cypress Equities project along Currie, but instead to a collection of several new developments and (importantly) rehabs of existing buildings that have all combined to take on a unique and identifiable flavor. If ten years from now half or all of the Cypress Equities buildings along Currie needed to be demolished and something new built there instead, the W7 area would definitely feel a change, but it would remain more or less the W7 neighborhood that it has become.

 

A bad development will place the worst parts of what it has to offer (e.g. a sea of parking) along its exterior portions and will configure its pedestrian and vehicular access in total disregard to any potential for access to and from its adjacent properties; basically, they'll just insulate their development from anything that is or may one day be around it. In some cases (particularly in strip malls and anything with a pad site), there will actually be physical barriers created that prevent anyone from being able to walk or drive seemlessly from one property onto another without first going onto the arterial. This not only isolates the development, but it also prevents it from ever contributing to or creating a true neighborhood (except as defined at the scale of an automobile - in which case a "neighborhood" may be defined as any collection of developments within a relatively short drive, as opposed to a cohesive and walkable district that is capable of developing its own identity that can be retained over time).

 

Right now, developers across the country have been seeing the changes in what consumers are looking for in where they live, work and play and have been responding by trying to build a better mall or build a better strip center or build a better apartment complex, and they will usually do this by trying to focus on adding "amenities" as though they were spices, when really the more effective response needs to happen at a much more basic level.

 

Edit: One last thought on walkability -

 

  • If walking is more of a theoretical possibility than a natural occurance - it's probably not "walkable"
  • If walking is really only likely (or for that matter possible) to occur within the very center of a particular development and not to and from surrounding properties - it's probably not "walkable"
  • If the expectation (and resulting physical design) is that the walking is going to be done by people who have no other choice (i.e. the poor wretched souls without a car) rather than the vast majority of visitors regardless of class, income or hiptser-tendencies - it's probably not "walkable"


#41 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 01 May 2014 - 09:57 AM

Whole Foods is officially coming to Waterside. Yippee! :glare: I would have been excited 15 years ago, but they have built stores in most metros in the country (sometimes multiples in ZIPs that don't rival the $$$ of many of Fort Worth's) somehow never thought Fort Worth was suitable???

 

http://www.globest.c...ket-345525.html



#42 Volare

Volare

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,188 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakhurst, Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:running, cycling, geocaching, photography, gardening, hunting, fishing...

Posted 01 May 2014 - 02:02 PM

If you put a 12' high fence around the place with a guarded gated entrance, my guess is you aren't too worried or interested in walking outside of your community.



#43 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,119 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:13 PM

Noticed some more detailed plans posted on Watersides site. I like the "Grove" idea, nice way of (somewhat) connecting the residents of the two apartments to the retail and office building. The whole plan is quite car dependent otherwise, but that's to be expected in this part of the city really. Better than nothing. 

 

 

ExEadK3.png

W36y3c3.png



#44 BlueMound

BlueMound

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 905 posts

Posted 14 October 2014 - 08:45 PM

Waterside begins construction
http://www.star-tele...tml?sp=/99/100/

#45 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,119 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 14 October 2014 - 09:45 PM

Woo, car chargers. So is this going to be the next thing that developers will use to call there developments green and sustainable? Yea, you pretty much have to drive here, but we have a couple of spots for electric cars! Welcome to 2014!

I can understand suburban esque development but not when it tries to make it self out to be things it's not.

#46 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 01 December 2014 - 01:21 PM

Construction is supposed to start on this project right after the start of the new year.



#47 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 01 December 2014 - 04:32 PM

I was there on Saturday.  The site is all but completely cleared; just a couple of shelters left along the river.  Ranch House?  Gone.  Pool?  Gone.  It's all gone except for those shelters.  (I wonder if they left them up to give the workers somewhere to eat lunch.)


My blog: Doohickie

#48 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 01 December 2014 - 04:56 PM

Thanks for the update.  I hadn't been by there in quite some time.



#49 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,120 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 02 December 2014 - 05:24 AM

To take this in a more productive direction, what policy changes would you each suggest that would have improved the shortcomings on this particular site?

Keep in mind the the market reality that the coveted anchor tenant, Whole Foods, probably insisted on VISIBLE surface parking between the street and its front door.

And garage parking costs substantially more than surface parking - not impossible but going crazy with structured parking isn't without substantial cost.

 

Any suggestions/ napkin sketch site plans?  

 

If you're new to this you might reference the Form Based Codes used on the Near Southside (development standards) or even look to the simpler City of Fort Worth's MU-1 and MU-2 zoning classes (much more blunt tools).  I'm guessing this site was not zoned MU.  What would the result have been should it have been zoned MU-1?

 

I think people's comments about the questionable use of the term "walkable" do apply to the Waterside project since it does appear to be isolated from the surrounding neighbohroods for pedestrian access.  I realize that the single family neighborhood across Bryant Irvin will also not really embrace Bryant Irvin but rather turn its back on it - and the only connection will be the "minor arterial" Arborlawn and crossing the "major arterial", Bryant Irvin. 



#50 Volare

Volare

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,188 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakhurst, Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:running, cycling, geocaching, photography, gardening, hunting, fishing...

Posted 05 December 2014 - 09:28 PM

I've seen Whole Foods in both Vancouver and Portland downtown. Neither have acres of parking.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Southwest FW, LMRA

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users