Jump to content


bclaridge

Member Since 28 Jun 2014
Offline Last Active Apr 19 2018 11:36 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: TCU's massive campus transformation continues

17 April 2018 - 06:37 AM

Although I'm excited for this new hotel, at the same time, I expect that TCU will have to find more space for parking lots since even what they currently have does not seem sufficient for the commuter students and staff.  While the Sandage lot wasn't the most utilized, losing it is going to hurt especially once you consider the parking lot they are taking out near Brite to build the new recital hall.


In Topic: Austin55' fiddlin around.

12 February 2018 - 09:40 PM

I always thought the pier one building at 750ft would be an awesome building to have as a signature tower. Same design but just stretched and tapered in at the top.

 

I feel like we seriously need a tower with a crown or spire or triangle top at some point..

 

I do think that Fort Worth could use a taller skyscraper.  Somewhere in the middle of the skyline with some type of defining feature up top would be perfect.


In Topic: River Oaks redevelopment

12 February 2018 - 06:17 PM

River Oaks is holding themselves back by not allowing any liquor sales.  No national grocery store will locate in the city limits.  Few restaurants will locate there for the same reason.  It is very puzzling to be a "dry" city in this day and time.


True. People here are generally opposed to apartments too, thinking they will just bring problems like crime. If they are nice apartments (like Elan River District) that would not be the case. They need to eliminate the dry aspect to get more economic development, pure and simple. Too many people here are stuck in the past, in my opinion.

I believe Benbrook is also dry and many of your points mentioned would also apply there too if that is the case.

EDIT: though Benbrook is better positioned with Interstate access and the like, including plenty of empty land facing Interstate 20 between Winscott and the Clear Fork Trinity River.  River Oaks would need to capitalize on access to 199 via 183 and/or Roberts Cut-Off road (including 820->199->Roberts Cut-Off), and/or proximity to the River District and NAS JRB Fort Worth.  The base proximity plays into the plans for the area proposed by NCTCOG, though I was not fond of the plans to connect Meandering directly to 183 by having Roberts Cut-Off south of Meandering becoming Meandering by using the curve (and where Roberts Cut-Off north of Meandering would make a T-intersection with this curve) as I thought this would ruin a potential town center development, although this would make East Gate access easier.  I have personally noticed more through traffic using Roberts Cut-Off in my life of living in this area, and to have to turn to continue north or south on Roberts Cut-Off is simply nonsense in my book.  My plan would also address the East Gate access issue by providing a slip lane from westbound 183 onto a new "downtown"-type street connecting with Meandering, and a slip lane for eastbound traffic leaving the base onto southbound Roberts Cut-Off for access to 183.


In Topic: I-35W to be expanded north of Downtown

29 January 2018 - 07:10 PM

The new toll lanes within existing roads makes for a perfect compromise in my opinion.  The added bonus, for those of us who like rules that encourage urban living, is that the toll lanes make life more expensive for people who choose to live way out in the suburbs (and not for us).  As a resident of central FW, I'm not really interested in my tax dollars paying for far-flung suburban freeway expansion built for commuters.

 

I agree with this statement completely, and this is one reason why I am a proponent of tolled managed lanes and/or HOV lanes for freeway expansions.  Though I think free lanes can and should be added to address bottlenecks.  I do think that 35W should have a 3-2-2-3 configuration between 820 and 287 sooner than later (especially given that northbound 35W through traffic behaves as an on-ramp where traffic merges in from 820), and this should be done once 35W is widened from 287 to Eagle Parkway in my opinion. Elsewhere on the North Tarrant Express, a third lane should be added on westbound 820 in North Richland Hills from Holiday Lane to the TEXpress Lanes entrance at Rufe Snow.

 

I've made some other statements regarding my arguments (some of which are re-hashed in my previous post above) in favor of managed lanes in another thread I posted in the Ideas and Suggestions for Projects forum: http://www.fortworth...?showtopic=6502


In Topic: I-35W to be expanded north of Downtown

29 January 2018 - 02:19 AM

I honest-to-God thought there were going to be 3-4 lanes on each side with tolls... not basically just taking what we had and just putting a toll in the middle of it. 

 

I guess there is an upside to that in that the suburbanites will have to pay to commute to the denser areas of town, whether that be with their time or money.  But Fort Worth is such a sprawled city that a lot of the jobs and residents are in the suburbs and not the central city.  That said, this should be an opportunity to invest in alternate forms of transit, even if it is just an express bus line that utilizes the TEXpress Lanes.

 

Also we should note that Houston's gargantuan Katy Freeway expansion did not get rid of congestion there; the previous freeway had a 3-1-3 configuration (three lanes per direction with one reversible HOV), and it now has 5-2-2-5 in most areas (five lanes per direction with two tolled managed lanes per direction).  The Katy expansion did relieve congestion for a couple of years, but then the congestion came back as more people filled the capacity of the freeway, whether that be because of new development or because people shifted their driving from adjacent arterials to the widened freeway.  Look up "induced demand" to see what I'm talking about; as long as gas prices stay reasonably inexpensive I'd expect the principle of induced demand to hold true with regards to road widenings.

 

Another complaint I have about the 35W expansion involves the interchange at 820, where traffic going from 820 to 35W (in any direction) merges into 35W on the left-hand side of the main lanes instead of the right side.  This means that through traffic on 35W's general purpose lanes behaves more like an on-ramp rather than through lanes where the traffic merging from 820 enters 35W.  If TxDOT had stuck with the original design for this interchange, this merging issue wouldn't have been a problem, though if there is more traffic coming from 820 rather than through traffic on 35W (which I doubt is the case) this design could have been beneficial.