Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Walsh development


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#1 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 04 August 2016 - 06:33 AM

A west Fort Worth development to bring in 50,000 new residents eventually and transform the mostly sage and tumbleweed look west of 820 is described in this eye-catching report from Channel 5.

 

 

http://www.nbcdfw.co...-389130271.html



#2 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,546 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 04 August 2016 - 08:12 AM

I have to wonder where the jobs for those 50K people with half-million-dollar homes are going to be... Are there thousands of new white-collar executive openings in Fort Worth that have not yet been advertised? Are these new businesses or are more major companies moving to North Texas, specifically western Tarrant County. If trends continue many of these new residents are going to be looking to commute to Collin County. Can you imagine the traffic jams on I-30 and on I-820/SH183/SH121? Even worse than the several pinch points built into the designs of the recently rebuilt free-toll-ways. No mention was made in the NBCDFW article of any plans for rail transportation from downtown Fort Worth out to the "Walsh" although I remember reading a few years ago that plans for transit stations were part of the master plan. If there are no intentions of providing "affordable housing" in this development there is going to be even more traffic generated by service workers who will have to commute to the Walsh are to staff the stores there. I suppose development attracts development; perhaps some other developers are looking at providing the job base and support facilities to make this sort of "city-within-a-city" possible.



#3 Jimmy

Jimmy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 257 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76116

Posted 04 August 2016 - 09:43 AM

Can you imagine the traffic jams on I-30 and on I-820/SH183/SH121? Even worse than the several pinch points built into the designs of the recently rebuilt free-toll-ways. No mention was made in the NBCDFW article of any plans for rail transportation from downtown Fort Worth out to the "Walsh" although I remember reading a few years ago that plans for transit stations were part of the master plan. 

 

This is one of my main concerns.  Would love to see a rail component, but not holding my breath.



#4 Big Frog II

Big Frog II

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 154 posts

Posted 04 August 2016 - 09:47 AM

I am concerned about the traffic on I-20 and I-30 now.  Don't know how they could handle this size development in their current state.  As for jobs, I think projects like this creates more jobs.  I also believe companies will look west towards these new developments to build or relocate, and I think everyone would be surprised how many people work from home.  Their job my be based in downtown, Arlington, Dallas, Collin County, etc. but they only go into the office once a week so they can live pretty much anywhere.



#5 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,025 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 04 August 2016 - 02:36 PM

Just going to enjoy that natural prairie landscape now until it's all gone...  


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#6 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 05 August 2016 - 06:58 AM

I'm as excited about the commercial and residential Walsh projects planned for the west side as I am about the Clearfork developments in the southwest part of the city.  One objective of having mixed-use projects is to provide housing (multi-family rental, condominium, or conventional single-family) for the employees who will work at the businesses there.  I don't know whether the executive officers and top-tier management people choose to live near their employees or reside farther away in the high-income residential subdivisions.  I'm not worried about transportation infrastructure in the foreseeable future.  Highways 820, I-20, I-30 and the Chisholm Trail Parkway are still below capacity west of town.  But I agree that commuter rail would be a good addition.



#7 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 05 August 2016 - 09:28 AM

I-30 west of University is regularly a parking lot coming in mornings and going out evenings.  I would say it is congested on the same scale as 35 south of Berry.



#8 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,025 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 05 August 2016 - 12:27 PM

More reason to expand the western end of I-30... you all know it's coming. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#9 Volare

Volare

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,185 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakhurst, Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:running, cycling, geocaching, photography, gardening, hunting, fishing...

Posted 06 August 2016 - 04:10 PM

More reason to expand the western end of I-30... you all know it's coming. 

 

Nah, we gotta wait until all the homes are built and the 50,000 people are in place. Then we will think about infrastructure.

It's The Fort Worth Way!TM



#10 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,040 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 06 August 2016 - 04:15 PM

Time for an Urban Growth Boundary ?



#11 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,757 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 06 August 2016 - 04:19 PM

I don't know if our law makers would go for it.  If you remember, most of them think that all development is good development.



#12 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 06 August 2016 - 04:41 PM

More reason to expand the western end of I-30... you all know it's coming.

 
Nah, we gotta wait until all the homes are built and the 50,000 people are in place. Then we will think about infrastructure.
It's The Fort Worth Way!TM


Or better yet, stop annexing halfway to Abilene 14 years ago, stop giving handouts and tax breaks to developers building outside of the loop, and more wisely use the money on mass transit.

#13 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,025 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 06 August 2016 - 05:34 PM

 

 

More reason to expand the western end of I-30... you all know it's coming.

 
Nah, we gotta wait until all the homes are built and the 50,000 people are in place. Then we will think about infrastructure.
It's The Fort Worth Way!TM

 


Or better yet, stop annexing halfway to Abilene 14 years ago, stop giving handouts and tax breaks to developers building outside of the loop, and more wisely use the money on mass transit.

 

 

If only... 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#14 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,040 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 06 August 2016 - 06:54 PM

Well there was that proposal to not give incentives to anything outside 820.

#15 Not Sure

Not Sure

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • Location:NRH

Posted 06 August 2016 - 08:08 PM

Years ago I worked in the civil engineering business and for a long time I was involved in developing a lot of the urban sprawl that surrounds us. I would trek out to pastures and oversee the placement of construction stakes, grading, paving and even the construction of homes throughout the developments. With each subdivision we seemed to creep farther and farther away from the city centers, from the airports and big employers. From Plano to Frisco to Prosper. From Rowlett to Rockwall to Royse City. From Allen to McKinney to Van Alstyne. But that development never seemed to really take hold on this side of the metroplex. And I have always thought that was a shame.

The development is going to happen anyway, so if it can occur closer to the heart of the metroplex it can cut down on time and miles spent commuting, which will have a positive effect on air quality, quality of life, and so on. I hate to see the prairie to the west go away, but the space between Weatherford and Fort Worth will be filled. I hope some of the points mentioned above are taken into consideration, particularly the idea that hoisting is developed nearby for the people who will provide the services the new affluent residents will seek.

#16 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,025 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 06 August 2016 - 09:08 PM

I'd much rather this just become its own town (Walsh, Texas) but like I always say with these projects... it ain't my money. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#17 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 15 August 2016 - 10:45 AM

Prairie CAN be preserved, whether public or private, with the use of conservation easements. 

They provide tax incentives to land owners who donate/forfeit the ability to develop in the future and can preserve critical open space and wildlife habitat for centuries to come. 

 

I really hope a lot of that happens in Parker County or else we will all be wishing something had been done before it was too late. 



#18 BlueMound

BlueMound

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 900 posts

Posted 03 September 2016 - 07:35 PM

http://www.star-tele...le99843757.html

#19 Now in Denton

Now in Denton

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth Denton Co.Tx. The new Fort Worth

Posted 04 September 2016 - 12:49 PM

I wholeheartedly reject Walsh being its own town for several reasons. For one I like how Dallas is more continual in its layout. Dallas is like a donut . You don't have several entities to deal with that have different city ordinance . While in Fort Worth. It is already like Swiss cheese. With some town that will pull you over just to get revenue. Yes I don't like some city ordinance but at least you know better what they are.

 

And I notice many smaller cities want a big city "Convention Center/Hotel" project. Fort Worth and Dallas has had a CCH for years. And has proven not to be the magic pill for economic development. I think here in North Texas we have to many of those already.

I read in the DMN how the Dallas Convention Center and Omni Hotel has become a white elephant. I blame Dallas for going over board by building too big. But I also blame smaller cities in North Texas for saturating the market with there own convention center hotel project.

Some things are better left for large cities. And the infill is going to happen not matter what. So it might as well be in as few cities as possible.

 

Or you will be left with several towns like White Settlement that looks to change its name to spur economic development. With all of Oak Cliffs problems. Maybe Oak Cliff  can becoming a city on its own ? That would be the worst of all options. At least Oak Cliff has the Mayor of Dallas talking about them.



#20 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,757 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 04 September 2016 - 03:41 PM

Oak Cliff was once a separate city from Dallas. 



#21 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,025 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 04 September 2016 - 05:56 PM

Oak Cliff was once a separate city from Dallas. 

 

Really?

I didn't know that... 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#22 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,757 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 04 September 2016 - 08:08 PM

Oak Cliff was indeed a separate city, but it became a part of Dallas in 1903. 

 

I don't want to drift this thread off topic, but did all of you know that North Fort Worth (the Northside not a part of the Stockyards), Niles City (the Stockyards themselves), and Polytechnic Heights were all separate cities and were once not a part of Fort Worth?



#23 jefffwd

jefffwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 04 September 2016 - 10:50 PM

Oak Cliff was indeed a separate city, but it became a part of Dallas in 1903. 

 

I don't want to drift this thread off topic, but did all of you know that North Fort Worth (the Northside not a part of the Stockyards), Niles City (the Stockyards themselves), and Polytechnic Heights were all separate cities and were once not a part of Fort Worth?

Interesting!  That I did not know but I do believe the county seat of Tarrant County at one time was Birdville, TX.  I don't believe anything is left of the former Birdville, TX with the exception of the Birdville Independent School District which serves Haltom City, North Richland Hills and other surrounding communities.



#24 Not Sure

Not Sure

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • Location:NRH

Posted 05 September 2016 - 01:47 AM

Not to get too far off topic, but...

 

According to the Handbook of Texas, Birdville was annexed by Haltom City by 1990. The area comprising the town seems to have been continuously settled since the county seat days, though the population dwindled considerably by the turn of the 20th century. By the 1950s the population was 400 residents.

 

The original school in Birdville was constructed on the site at the northeast corner of Belknap and Carson, which today houses the administrative offices of Birdville ISD. It was originally called Birdville Academy then later Birdville High School until the Richland High School campus opened in 1961, at which point it was renamed Haltom High School. Once the Haltom High School campus north of 820 on Haltom Road was constructed in the mid 80s, the former Birdville high school came into use as a special education and administrative facility. The third high school campus constructed near the intersection of Precinct Line Road and Mid Cities Blvd in North Richland Hills was named Birdville High School, though it is quite distant from the original settlement of Birdville.



#25 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,040 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 11 April 2017 - 07:47 PM

Walsh has opened a leasing center.... In Sundance Square?

 

FWBP with more.



#26 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:26 AM

Walsh has opened a leasing center.... In Sundance Square?.....

 

It will not sadden me if this project falls flat. 

 

Extraterritorial developments such as Walsh are not good for the ultimate goal of establishing the urban density and efficiency that Fort Worth should aim for.


  • JBB likes this

#27 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 553 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 11:46 AM

Keep wishing Renamerusk--these types of developments are what it will take for your dream airport to ever come to fruition.  So don't ask for failure.   



#28 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,025 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 12 April 2017 - 05:05 PM

 


Walsh has opened a leasing center.... In Sundance Square?.....

 
It will not sadden me if this project falls flat. 
 
Extraterritorial developments such as Walsh are not good for the ultimate goal of establishing the urban density and efficiency that Fort Worth should aim for.
 
It's unlikely that it will fail. As long as there are people who want "city life" without actually being IN the city, these will pop up. I'd be happier if this was developing into its own little independent city, but I highly doubt that's the goal. 

But look at it this way: 
 This doesn't STOP any urban density and efficiency. It's not like these suburban projects are preventing what we're seeing in downtown, Near Southside, West 7th (...even though it may have its own issues at the moment), the future Panther Island (...when it really gets going), or the other Urban Villages around the core. 

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#29 Big Frog II

Big Frog II

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 154 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:07 PM

As much money as the Walsh family has, I seriously doubt that this project will fail.  They have the ability to weather economic downturns that a lot of developers do not.  Also, being in the Aledo school district will be a huge selling point.



#30 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:08 PM

.....I'd be happier if this was developing into its own little independent city, but I highly doubt that's the goal. ....But look at it this way: 
 This doesn't STOP any urban density and efficiency. It's not like these suburban projects are preventing what we're seeing in downtown, Near Southside, West 7th (...even though it may have its own issues at the moment), the future Panther Island (...when it really gets going), or the other Urban Villages around the core. 

 

 

Keep wishing Renamerusk--these types of developments are what it will take for your dream airport to ever come to fruition.  So don't ask for failure.   

 

J. - To your first point. I agree.  Why not incorporate and stop pretending that you want to be a part of Fort Worth other then having a need get help with the initial and expensive infrastructure.  Walsh Ranch will never market itself as Fort Worth or even West Fort Worth.

 

YA - indeed increasing population numbers west of Downtown, even if in Parker County will increase the need for a 2nd regional airport and perhaps even a 3rd regional airport for (Collin County) in the region.  North Texas is home to two largest domestic airlines.  Both airlines have inconsiderable clot in their perspective city; so that neither city is willing to buck their hometown airline who is 100% invested in their personal airport. 

 

AA played you and others about relocating to another city in the region to get a deal from Fort Worth.  AA would have never abandoned its investment at and near DFW just for a penthouse in Uptown Dallas.  Logistically it just was not or ever feasible.  It was almost too obvious for anyone using common sense.

 

I hope that a time will come soon when Fort Worth will feel less pressure to appease AA and will begin to consider the needs of 500K residents who live west of Downtown by offering them greater convenience to air service than they now have at either DFW or Love.

 

It is purely speculation on my part but Fort Worth and AA likely have an unspoken agreement that neither will do the other any harm.  This unspoken agreement, more than a lack of demand, probably explains why a regional airport is not in the immediate future for West Fort Worth.  I do hope and believe that when North Texas surpasses the 9 million mark and when the military becomes increasing more efficient by replacing jet fighters with drones that the facility that is Carswell will be better used as a commercial airport creating thousands of new travel related jobs for that immediate area. 

 

As impossible as it is for you to prove your negative (that there will never be a regional airport), it also appears impossible for you to prove why there should not be a regional airport to serve Greater West Fort Worth.  I am curious to know just why you don't want a regional airport in West Fort Worth.

 



#31 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:15 PM

As much money as the Walsh family has, I seriously doubt that this project will fail.  They have the ability to weather economic downturns that a lot of developers do not.  Also, being in the Aledo school district will be a huge selling point.

 

I think it could fail if the development fails to attract a number of corporate relocation, as is being done so successfully by Frisco, Texas and to some extent the Alliance Fort Worth.  Again, corporations will want to have the convenience of air transportation.  A good highway and transportation network brings jobs, not schools necessarily.  Walsh Ranch is as about as far from an airport as any place this side of DFW.



#32 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,040 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:26 PM

Walsh is about 33 miles from the airport, about the same as McKinney

 

kutSzTH.png



#33 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:35 PM

Walsh is about 33 miles from the airport, about the same as McKinney

 

 But Mckinney is the County Seat and is also an incorporated city. 

 

Do you think Fort Worth should have parts of its city 33 miles from the airport?



#34 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,040 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:45 PM

No I was just curious for comparison's sake. Not a fan of this development at all.



#35 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 13 April 2017 - 06:05 AM

I'm puzzled as to why folks here are picking on this particular residential and commercial development west of Fort Worth.  As we've seen over the decades, growth is occurring gradually in various parts west of I-820.  It's only a matter of time before the gap between Aledo and Weatherford is urbanized.  The Star-Telegram article  (Post#18) reports that the Walsh development will be ongoing for the next 50 years. 

 

Insisting that this new development be within a city limits, or not occur at all, goes against the grain of a market-driven economy.  Regional and local urban planners having been doing there best since the 1960s to manage these growth patterns.  You can't stop it, so just cope with it.  Allow me a cliché:  The cat got out of the bag in the sagebrush out there long ago and you'll never get her back in it.



#36 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 13 April 2017 - 10:50 AM

I'm puzzled as to why folks here are picking on this particular residential and commercial development west of Fort Worth....

 

Does Alaska and Hawaii come to mind in relationship to the "Continental 48?"  Perhaps the answer to the puzzle is "west of Fort Worth", ergo that vast area west of Fort Worth could theoretically seek to be annexed into Fort Worth for commercial/realty gain for developers.  I would suggest that Fort Worth resources are so vastly infinitesimal and irrational than the one when the U.S. annexed its last two states that it is a risk and a burden upon services within the core of the City.

Redeveloping core and older neighborhoods is a more effective way of using resources.

 

 

And then, on the practical side, what assurance does the City has that Walsh Ranch will generate a return surpassing or equaling the initial investment?



#37 Mr_Brightside526

Mr_Brightside526

    Member

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

Posted 13 April 2017 - 11:16 AM

The Walsh development is what Fort Worth needs in order to attract corporate relocations. These businesses are passing Fort Worth up for cities with better schools, the mayor has said so herself. Texas families are always going to want their kids growing up somewhere they can play in a yard, while still having access to parks and lakes (and decent transit). The parents of these children however are still going to want to go out for date night and celebrations, hence why as long as downtown stays so appealing there hopefully will be continued interior and exterior growth in Fort Worth.

 

With the exception of maybe Fairmount where you had an influx of people into the area before it was as attractive as it is today, typically I see young professionals and empty nesters in these urban neighborhoods. I think this sort of development will be good for Fort Worth to attract larger companies because these companies do more than just bring people who buy property and eat. Developments like Walsh are what will make areas like Camp Bowie, Race St, the River District, Berry St, Clearfork and the Northside grow into more urban neighborhoods interior neighborhoods, imo.

 

This is why I hope the ability to seed an urban neighborhood development out in Summer Creek Station is successful. Because as the city grows outward, we are going to need to continue to seed urban villages within the spread of the city.



#38 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 13 April 2017 - 12:09 PM

Walsh Ranch will attract no more corporate relocations than all of the development in far north Fort Worth that feeds into Keller schools has in the last 20 years.

I don't have a problem with the development in general, but I wish FW had not broken its neck to annex the area. As rename suggests, the return on investment on the infrastructure and support is not going to work in the city's favor.

#39 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 13 April 2017 - 02:48 PM

The Walsh development is what Fort Worth needs in order to attract corporate relocations. These businesses are passing Fort Worth up for cities with better schools, the mayor has said so herself. Texas families are always going to want their kids growing up somewhere they can play in a yard, while still having access to parks and lakes (and decent transit)....

 

I think that the Mayor is not being completely honest.  Corporations look first for tax breaks and incentives, labor force and infrastructure ahead of schooling.  The choice of schools, whether it be private or public is always the decision of the parents.

 

However, if the Mayor does believe that schools are the reason that Fort Worth is being overlooked, then for the Mayor the solution is to improve schools.  By the way, the Mayor can also improve public safety, parks and transit.



#40 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,379 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 13 April 2017 - 03:17 PM

And then, on the practical side, what assurance does the City has that Walsh Ranch will generate a return surpassing or equaling the initial investment?


It's questions like this that created the Rust Belt.


My blog: Doohickie

#41 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 13 April 2017 - 05:19 PM

 

And then, on the practical side, what assurance does the City has that Walsh Ranch will generate a return surpassing or equaling the initial investment?


It's questions like this that created the Rust Belt.

 

How so?



#42 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,379 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 13 April 2017 - 08:47 PM

If you're not expanding, you're shrinking.  When you stop expanding your horizons because you're worried about the payback, and worry more about consolidation, decline starts.


My blog: Doohickie

#43 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,379 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 13 April 2017 - 08:49 PM

The comparison to McKinney is interesting actually.  Do you think Dallas wishes they had some of that Plano/McKinney/Frisco action in their tax base?


My blog: Doohickie

#44 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 14 April 2017 - 07:29 AM

If you're not expanding, you're shrinking.  When you stop expanding your horizons because you're worried about the payback, and worry more about consolidation, decline starts.

 

The comparison to McKinney is interesting actually.  Do you think Dallas wishes they had some of that Plano/McKinney/Frisco action in their tax base?

 

I was taught and came to understand that the Rust Belt is a result of the changes in technology; the transformation from a manufacturing economy to a service economy; and lower taxes in the Sun Belt coupled with cheaper global labor factors.  It is interesting to learn that it may have been created by the states of the Rust Belt simply failing to expand into the Southwest.

 

Dallas could no more expand into Collin County as could it expand into Kaufman or Denton County just to take those cities and county tax bases for itself.  Dallas ought to focus on generating its next tax base in its southern, eastern and western regions where already has jurisdiction.   Of, course that is another issue all together.



#45 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,379 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 14 April 2017 - 07:44 AM

Without going off on a whole other tangent:  I think the ultimate cause of the rust belt failure was thinking that just by sustaining what they had, they'd be fine.  They got complacent and other regions and countries who were hungrier nibbled away at their economic base.

 

And yet after years of decline, a lot of Rust Belt cities are surging.  Why?  Because *they* became hungry, and looked to market their advantages to bring business back.

 

It's bigger than just promoting development, but getting back on topic I think in the end Walsh Ranch will provide nice dividends for any investments being made now.


My blog: Doohickie

#46 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 14 April 2017 - 08:59 AM

... They got complacent and other regions and countries who were hungrier nibbled away at their economic base....It's bigger than just promoting development, but getting back on topic I think in the end Walsh Ranch will provide nice dividends for any investments being made now.

 

 I find it naive to think that the U.S. as a whole could have competed with the cheap labor and low workers' standards in the developing economies of the world which hit the manufacturing sector of the American Economy. The region was not complacent to or even capable of preventing the importation of cheaper products for which Americans have become accustomed.

 

As for any investments being made now by the City, I would argue that investments in transit and upgrading existing public works infrastructure will provide a much greater dividend to the City than Walsh Ranch will ever pay. 

 

Walsh Ranch is by my reckoning a public subsidy to a wealthy landowning family so isolated from job centers that it will have little to offer other than to stretch the finite resources of the City to provide public services.



#47 mmmdan

mmmdan

    Senior Member

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

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:12 AM

Stepping on my soapbox

 

We already know that these developments don't even pay the actual cost to hook up to the existing utilities.  There have been several articles in the Star-Telegram that have mentioned it.  I can't remember the actual numbers, so I'll use some ones that are as best I can remember.  The hookup fee is supposed to be $3,400, but for the longest time the city only charged something like $600.  They have been increasing the fee, but it still is not enough to actually cover the cost of just connecting to the citie's services.

 

We've also see how much it costs to add police and fire coverage for these far flung areas.  http://www.star-tele...cle3873567.html

 

We also know that they don't even market themselves as being Fort Worth.  http://www.alliancetexas.com/

 

I wonder if the city has ever done a real cost benefit analysis for these far flung areas.  Do they really bring in the tax money to cover all the new expenses that they bring?  Sure the developer may pay to put in the streets and other infrastructure, but then it gets turned over to the city to maintain and replace when it gets worn out.

 

This is the type of analysis I would love to see.  https://www.strongto...ty-has-no-money  Then we could really see how much are city is really prospering with these new developments.

 

I remember when the streetcar was still a thing and there was a quote from someone in Far North Fort Worth stating how they didn't want to see there tax money going to something that they would never use.  Well, I'm curious to see how much of my tax money is going to these far flung neighborhoods that I will never use.

 

There was another time where the paper was quoting someone and they didn't even fully realize that they lived in Fort Worth since they had a Keller zip code and their kids went to Keller ISD.

 

 



#48 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 08 November 2017 - 03:24 PM

Aledo voters defeat school propositions.  This has to be seen as a potential problem for this development. 

 

 

The people in Aledo apparently do not want massive growth coming to their area.



#49 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 08 November 2017 - 04:19 PM

Only one part of one of the propositions really addressed the Walsh growth. I'm sure it isn't good news, but districts typically find a way to revisit and repackage failed bond packages to make them a better pill to swallow. From what I could read on the Facebook page for the group that formed to oppose the bond, they opposed the high costs of the proposals coupled with the existing debt on the books.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users