Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Another large apartment building planned on Rosedale

Near Southside apartments rosedale

  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 22 July 2016 - 03:25 PM

Lang Partners, the same folks behind the Oleander apartments just five blocks down the road seem to be planning another building (or buildings). Not much else I know, but it appears they are hoping for 6 stories.  

 

 

 

ZC-16-140 Real Estate 1001-1044 W. Rosedale NST4 to PD for 6 stories 08/10/16 09/13/16

 

 

UDC-16-18 Near Soutthside Located between S. Adams St., W. Rosedale St., College Ave, and Oleander Walk Owner/Agent: Lang Partners Requests a recommendation for approval for rezoning from NS-T4N to NST4

 

Here's the blocks mentioned, however I'm not sure the exact extent. 

 

rosedaleapts_zps0zrhnojn.png

 

Because Lang owns the entire western block excluding the one house on the SE corner and most of the northern half of the eastern block, I suspect this could look like the Oleander project down the street where there are essentially two buildings. Checking tad, below is the land owned by Lang and/or "WASHINGTON ADAMS PROPERTY LLC" who I assume are an involved party.

 

rosedaleapts2_zpsyduyi0eg.png

 

Thats about all I know for know, but something to look out for to see what happens. 

 

 



#2 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 22 July 2016 - 10:00 PM

Two more massive residential buildings? Wow!

 

Some more good news: there are no massive retaining walls along those two blocks.


- Dylan


#3 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 22 July 2016 - 11:00 PM

When it all comes down I hope that at least the two older houses bordering Oleander are preserved, either in place or moved to a new location where they could join some other older residential buildings.



#4 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 23 July 2016 - 08:28 PM

They could be moved into vacant lots in Fairmount.



#5 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 07 August 2016 - 01:04 PM

391 units, Wow! Looks like the two houses will be preserved. It will have skybridges between the buildings similar to the other Lang development down the street.

CpR3B5gUMAAwPNJ.jpg

@Urb:httpitter.com/UrbanFortWorth/status/762360284384079872?s=09



#6 Zetna

Zetna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 134 posts
  • Location:Fairmount

Posted 07 August 2016 - 01:28 PM

They could be moved into vacant lots in Fairmount.

Not sure there are any more vacant lots in Fairmount...the house w/ the corner entry tower was supposedly built in 1904.



#7 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 07 August 2016 - 03:05 PM

I haven't driven or ridden a bicycle down every street in Fairmount in a long time, so it doesn't surprise me that all of the vacant lots have been filled in.  However, if the houses are staying, then that is all the better. 



#8 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 15 September 2016 - 03:25 PM

screenshots from the zoning commish. There were 16  neighbors in opposition of it however, and only 4 in favor. Bunch of worries about density, which is perhaps understandable in an area which is a bit less dense than some areas, but more so than most of Fairmount. That might spell trouble. 

 

CsbJ1DCUEAAASRT.jpg

 

CsbJ1C9UEAArKMR.jpg

 

CsbJ1C-UIAAZvQQ.jpg



#9 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 15 September 2016 - 06:12 PM

screenshots from the zoning commish. There were 16  neighbors in opposition of it however, and only 4 in favor. Bunch of worries about density, which is perhaps understandable in an area which is a bit less dense than some areas, but more so than most of Fairmount. That might spell trouble. 

CsbJ1C9UEAArKMR.jpg

 

I know someone who lives in the condos in the lower left corner of that picture.  He's not happy about the new buildings and has spoken out in opposition.


My blog: Doohickie

#10 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 15 September 2016 - 09:08 PM

What? Someone who lives in a new townhome building that dwarfs nearby historic homes is complaining about a large new apartment building that will dwarf his current townhome building? That's funny.


- Dylan


#11 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,661 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 15 September 2016 - 09:12 PM

Did someone mention "Brutalist?"  Say no more; this is it.



#12 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,004 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 15 September 2016 - 10:31 PM

Not really... it's just a base model. Not the ACTUAL design.


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#13 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 16 September 2016 - 01:32 AM

Yeh. Theres no renderings of the whole building, just along the street, but they mention it will be brick with metal accents, which sounds nice.

#14 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,661 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 16 September 2016 - 04:46 AM

Yeh. Theres no renderings of the whole building, just along the street, but they mention it will be brick with metal accents, which sounds nice.

 

 Scale wise, it is still brutal.  May have been better to go upwards - 10 stories along Rosedale.



#15 Thurman52

Thurman52

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,106 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edwards Ranch

Posted 16 September 2016 - 06:41 AM

Cheaper this way. Stick built with precast concrete garage.

#16 mmmdan

mmmdan

    Senior Member

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

Posted 16 September 2016 - 10:17 AM

The city can't (shouldn't) keep expanding outward.  At some point everything close to downtown is going to get more dense.



#17 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,315 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 16 September 2016 - 11:27 AM

There were 16  neighbors in opposition of it however, and only 4 in favor. Bunch of worries about density

 
 

Scale wise, it is still brutal.  May have been better to go upwards - 10 stories along Rosedale.


If density is the main concern, going up doesn't address that.

#18 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,004 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 16 September 2016 - 01:36 PM

Considering that these people chose to live in the CENTER of a major city where it's supposed to be built densely, they really can't complain too much... 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#19 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,661 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 16 September 2016 - 04:55 PM

 
If density is the main concern, going up doesn't address that.

 

 

 Sure it does.   1,000 residents on a 1/4 acre is greater density than 1,000 residents on 4 acres.



#20 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,315 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 16 September 2016 - 05:20 PM

I'm assuming their complaint is too much density, not too little. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

#21 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 16 September 2016 - 05:23 PM

You are right. Density, traffic & increased crime were the concerns. Typical NIMBY complaints, but understandable complaints as well.

#22 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 20 September 2016 - 05:05 PM

Building a 10 floor (concrete) structure is not an even trade for a 5-6 story wood over podium structure. 

Even if the number of units is similar, the cost of constructing a concrete structure is significantly higher.  I'm not right on top of multifamily rents in this location but I strongly suspect that the anticipated rents do not justify building a concrete structure, but they do justify a wood over podium.

 

Often, I suspect, neighbors come out opposing "density", citing traffic concerns.  While they may be sincere, the increase in automotive traffic generated by this project will be negligible (especially compared with the realistic alternative - a lifeless medical office building).  Perhaps neighbors are concerned about the durability of the apartment buildings - that is more legitimate concern in my opinion, although I'm not aware of a good tool neighborhoods have to dictate that the developer uses high quality, more durable materials that matter (roofing, parapet coping, etc), other than forbidding EIFS/Dryvit and other single coat synthetic stucco systems. 

 

For the Near Southside and all other up and coming, urban villages to be truly walkable, viable districts, it is extremely helpful to have some of these rare remaining large tracts developed with higher density residential.  Otherwise, the retail and restaurants will continue to be 95% dependent on drive-in customers.  This project will only add 400-500 additional residents, but that is another solid piece of progress, in my opinion.


  • JBB likes this

#23 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,315 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 20 September 2016 - 05:38 PM

Well said. I think that in cases like this that density concerns are a carry over of the suburban mindset that apartments = density = crime, without taking into consideration that rent is likely going to be high enough to keep out most petty crime.  I'm well aware that this isn't exactly a suburban area, but I bet if you asked the neighbors opposed to this project if they live in an urban area, a vast majority of them would say "no".



#24 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 07 October 2016 - 10:58 PM

I don't know where the neighbors live who voiced concerns about this project, however in my personal experience attending my various neighborhoods' meetings, most vocal attendees had little or no background or strong understanding of planning, design, or development, and often take a "no" position as a default because they are just generally nervous about what they don't understand.  I felt they were genuinely trying to help, but it was clear they were not familiar with how moderate to higher density uses (depending on the situation) can work well, and similarly, how residential uses exist gracefully next to commercial uses.  Some of our nation's finest neighborhoods have this condition, where one can walk from his/her house to a corner store or restaurant (New Orleans Garden District, central Charleston SC, several neighborhoods in San Francisco, Chicago, Portland, etc..)

 

Often it seems residents seem hyper-concerned about cars parked on their streets.  I've actually heard residents cite that it is a sign of a "neighborhood in decline when you see cars parked overnight on the street".  This type of attitude is IMO very outdated, and is a real barrier to creating healthy, walkable, sustainable neighborhoods. 



#25 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:30 PM

but I bet if you asked the neighbors opposed to this project if they live in an urban area, a vast majority of them would say "no".

You'd lose that bet.


My blog: Doohickie

#26 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:34 PM

I don't know where the neighbors live who voiced concerns about this project, however in my personal experience attending my various neighborhoods' meetings, most vocal attendees had little or no background or strong understanding of planning, design, or development, and often take a "no" position as a default because they are just generally nervous about what they don't understand.  I felt they were genuinely trying to help, but it was clear they were not familiar with how moderate to higher density uses (depending on the situation) can work well, and similarly, how residential uses exist gracefully next to commercial uses.  Some of our nation's finest neighborhoods have this condition, where one can walk from his/her house to a corner store or restaurant (New Orleans Garden District, central Charleston SC, several neighborhoods in San Francisco, Chicago, Portland, etc..)

 

Often it seems residents seem hyper-concerned about cars parked on their streets.  I've actually heard residents cite that it is a sign of a "neighborhood in decline when you see cars parked overnight on the street".  This type of attitude is IMO very outdated, and is a real barrier to creating healthy, walkable, sustainable neighborhoods. 

 

You're constructing a strawman here.

 

The concern is that this project will be considerably taller than the nearby condos (which are 3 stories with rooftop patios on the 4th floor level).  They lose a considerable level of privacy.  They understand that this concern by itself won't carry much weight, so they're looking at other technicalities.  I think they recognize it's likely a losing battle.


My blog: Doohickie

#27 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:39 PM

It's going to the council and was recommended for denial by the zoning commission, so it could be interesting to see where this goes. 



#28 Zetna

Zetna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 134 posts
  • Location:Fairmount

Posted 22 November 2016 - 02:24 PM

1904 house that I thought would be saved is for sale for $1 to move it; otherwise will be torn down......so much for history.



#29 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 05 January 2017 - 08:50 PM

3DJHlCd.png

 

6ZexiGn.png



#30 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 574 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 05 January 2017 - 11:01 PM

I hope there are some plans for retail on Rosedale at least.

#31 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 06 January 2017 - 09:00 AM

The word that comes to mind when I see that is that it looks like a "compound."

 

The style to me says 1980s.


My blog: Doohickie

#32 dfwerdoc

dfwerdoc

    Member

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

Posted 07 January 2017 - 01:26 AM

the density is beautiful. people with jobs paying rent walking around and  looking for places to grab  a bite 



#33 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 07 January 2017 - 01:12 PM

Excluding the portion which bridges over the street I like the proposed look. It will look nice with the proposed boutique hotel as well.

#34 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 11 January 2017 - 08:20 PM

Just curious.... what do you think of this for the Rosedale location in lieu of that blocky thing?
 
new-building-by-Ashkers-e1484171784904.j
 
It's a proposal for a new building in Buffalo, NY.  (If you're curious, this is what's currently on the site.)

 

Another part of the project:

 

Arbor-Reverie-1100x733.jpg

 

And what's currently there now.  It's interesting that they're keeping many of the street level facades.  I bet that will make for some challenging construction.


My blog: Doohickie

#35 Mr_Brightside526

Mr_Brightside526

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 196 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Linwood
  • Interests:Fort Worth

Posted 12 January 2017 - 08:54 AM

This kind of detailed and diverse architecture is just what a neighborhood needs.

 

I'm a fan!



#36 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 12 January 2017 - 03:56 PM

That looks like a cluttered mess to me...

#37 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 12 January 2017 - 09:17 PM

At least it doesn't look like a soul-crushing Communist apartment block.


My blog: Doohickie

#38 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 13 January 2017 - 03:30 PM

Here's some more background on the design

 

Inspiration

 

y8HUZSN.png

 

dxdGhgN.png

 

Also, there's more than just that huge bit over the road, there's also more skybridges....

nWn5aM2.png



#39 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 13 January 2017 - 11:15 PM

That just reinforces my impression of the new building.  Those other examples are reminiscent of Soviet block housing too.

 

The best thing I can say about that design is that it reminds me of college housing.


My blog: Doohickie

#40 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 13 January 2017 - 11:24 PM

Here's some more background on the design

 

dxdGhgN.png

 

That whole thing about how they developed their facade sounds like it was done as some kind of algorithm to replace actual, you know, design principles.  That formulaic formulation of the design dehumanizes it, which is why it reinforces my "soulless Soviet block" impression.

 

Maybe the street level experience can overcome that modified monolith design.  We'll see.


My blog: Doohickie

#41 Mr_Brightside526

Mr_Brightside526

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 196 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Linwood
  • Interests:Fort Worth

Posted 17 January 2017 - 09:37 AM

I wholeheartedly agree with you Doohickie. This design reminds me of Brutalist architecture, and when you age it 30-40 years, it looks depressing, tired and dingy.



#42 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 29 March 2017 - 08:06 PM

All sorts of wood on site for this. Assuming it will get going soon.



#43 dfwerdoc

dfwerdoc

    Member

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

Posted 15 May 2017 - 05:43 AM

a while back this got rejected at zoning. did it make it through city council? 



#44 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 15 May 2017 - 03:31 PM

It went before council October 11th, but I cannot find a decision. 



#45 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 15 May 2017 - 03:56 PM

Yes, it went through.


My blog: Doohickie

#46 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,846 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 16 May 2017 - 08:48 AM

The artist drawing, Post#38, would be great if this were a planned college administration building.  Alas, quality-living apartment complex?

 

Now, the artist drawing, Post#34, is a bit more colorful, to be fair.







0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users