Jump to content


Member Since 21 Feb 2012
Offline Last Active Jan 03 2018 10:55 PM

#98281 Fort Worth Parks

Posted by brownjd on 08 August 2016 - 09:56 AM

Notice I didn't say there wasn't any value in the schools or the city offering swim instruction, but it's far more important for that responsibility to fall on the parents. If a kid makes it to school without having learned how to swim, they've made it past one of the riskiest times for drowning.


With only two public pools (three if you count the upcoming YMCA public/private pool) in the city, I don't see a lot of options for most parents to teach their kids to swim. Every time we've tried to go to Forest Park pool, it has been jam packed. Unfortunately, people don't seem to be clamoring to rebuild the old pools.


We've enrolled our kids in the swim classes offered by the city and found them to be a good value for our money.

#94919 Fort Worth Parks

Posted by brownjd on 04 December 2015 - 09:36 AM


There's a really great wooden playground at Tillery Park off of Forest Park Blvd that is relatively large by today's standards.  



The material for the park is Trex.


The layout was designed (through drawings provided to professional designers) by Lily B Clayton students. Friends of Tillery Park (501c3),  Berkeley Place & Mistletoe Heights residents built, installed, and continue to maintain it. Funding was provided through corporate and private donations. 

#91309 Forest Park Blvd road diet opinions

Posted by brownjd on 30 April 2015 - 10:55 AM


Finally, I know it's too early for any meaningful data collection but since one of the main goals for this project was increased safety, have there been any accidents since the diet was implemented?



Welcome back Heinz!


TPW did a follow up study. Short version is that speeds went down, traffic volume stayed the same (so traffic didn't move to side streets), and it's too early to tell on accidents.


Several more road diets have been implemented since. 

#87491 400 S. Jennings

Posted by brownjd on 26 September 2014 - 09:22 AM

...and it looks like the dominos are finally starting to collapse like a house of cards.  Checkmate.




Dominos, Cards, and Chess in the same metaphor. That's what I call mixed-use!


Speaking of which, there will be a little retail on the NE corner and ground floor live/work units along Jennings.

#84768 Convention Center Arena Study

Posted by brownjd on 12 June 2014 - 11:48 AM


From what I have read the identified need is exhibit or "ballroom" space, not a theater. When and if a theater facility is needed people should loudly lament the destruction of the Majestic Theater formerly located right across Commerce Street. 


"Hey guys, we want to build a HIDEOUSLY UGLY windowless bunker for the Convention Center HVAC system.  Let's tear down this historic theater to build it."


"What about literally any of these other lots anywhere around the Convention Center?"


"Nope!  Gotta be this one!  I got a hankerin' to slaughter some history and replace it with charmless, unfriendly garbage!" *


*note - this sentence also applies to the overall Convention Center project



You did get a nice curve in the street out of the deal.


What's better than a super block? A super block with curves, of course!

#69566 TEX Rail project

Posted by brownjd on 16 April 2012 - 01:13 PM

I heard it stated more than once at the traffic meeting I attended that one of the goals of the road diet was to get commuters to use alternate routes such as University or 8th St. Your goal may be to get traffic to slow down and that's fine. Somehow you chose to live near that roadway and we all have to make it right for you. You phrase it as "trying to make it safer for everyone". But I find it a bit "elitist" to force unwanted commuters into alternate routes and make them someone else's problem. Then turn around and say that others should just blindly welcome a train station near their house.


As it turns out, roads that have undergone a road diet carry the same number of vehicles as they did prior to the conversion. When I first started investigating the idea, I expected there to be a diversion of traffic to other streets. I still maintain that 8th Avenue and University are far better commuter streets (and designated commercial delivery routes), but all evidence points to almost identical average daily vehicle volumes after a road diet. So bottom line, traffic would not be diverted; it would just slow down. Win for everyone.

Regarding the train stop, Berkeley has already stated that we will back Mistletoe whichever way you vote. I'm not saying you should do anything. What I said is that I'd love to have a TEX Rail stop near Berkeley. If you guys vote it down, I'll be the first lobbying for it next to my neighborhood. How's that for elitist?

The following is an excerpt from the Mistletoe Heights March newsletter. The author is on our traffic comittee...

"... eastbound motorists back up nearly to Jerome at evening rush hour, while Julie and I sip wine on our porch and ridicule them for not living closer to work. I sometimes park my cars in the street, three feet from the curb and right up to Forest Park, just to slow traffic. I push my yard cart into the middle of Mistletoe while I mow the lawn; cars sometimes run it down. My daughter learned how to ride her bike in our backyard, not out in the street. And remember those “Slow Down!” kitty crossing signs? I had the biggest one, the one with blood in its eyes, until someone stole it."

If this is how our traffic committee thinks then I become highly skeptical of their agenda and begin to question their motives. God forbid your child can't learn to ride their bike on a public roadway. The HORROR!

Sounds like this person cares about traffic. Perhaps he should form a committee. Oh wait...

#69531 TEX Rail project

Posted by brownjd on 13 April 2012 - 04:08 PM

Just as a comparison, Forest Park Blvd. was a busy street long before many of the current residents moved into the Berkely and Mistletoe neighborhoods. And yet their push for a "road diet" gets everybody all giddy over the notion of forcing commuters out of their neighborhoods so the bicyclists, children and pedestrians pushing baby strollers will be safer.

Minor correction Heinz: Just as a comparison, Forest Park Blvd. was a busy street long before many of the current residents moved into the Berkely and Mistletoe neighborhoods. And yet their push for a "road diet" gets everybody all giddy over the notion of forcing commuters out of their neighborhoods to slow down so the bicyclists, children and pedestrians pushing baby strollers will be safer.

#69489 TEX Rail project

Posted by brownjd on 11 April 2012 - 02:22 PM

John, after your campaign to have Forest Park Blvd. put on a "road diet" I'm a bit surprised to hear you say this. :laugh:

I live fairly close (within 2 blocks) to the proposed Mistletoe location so I do have personal concerns about noise pollution, traffic and potential associated decline in residential property values in the immediate vicinity.

To me, this issue seems somewhat similar to the apartment construction issue facing some Berkely residents. If I'm not mistaken, it sounds like the apartment developer is willing to work with Berkely to minimize impact and I would hope that the city (and medical district) show Mistletoe Heights residents the same type of consideration in deciding on the rail station.

The commuter rail station should NOT be located based on criteria such as:
-- It's the cheapest solution
-- It's the quickest solution

For me, the question comes down to "Which station location make the most sense to most users?".

I would speculate that the majority of rail patrons getting on or off at this stop would be going to or leaving from the medical district. If that's the case then the station should be located as conveniently (not necessarily centrally) as possible for the majority of medical district employees/clients/patients. The presence of the hotel at Midtown (with plans for a second hotel I believe?) might suggest that many of the hotel occupants could be staying there for medical-related reasons. That in itself might support Midtown as the preferred location.

Based on where I live, I would prefer the Midtown location so as to minimize impact to Mistletoe residents in terms of noise pollution. I think the Midtown development itself would benefit from this location, spurring some retail/restaurant development.

By the way, does anybody know if the city has begun negotiations with the railroad for use of the tracks?


I don't have a dog in the fight (at least on TEX Rail, FP is another matter), but here's what I know.

The T and Baylor will not move forward with the Mistletoe station without the neighborhood's support.
Mistletoe's traffic committee has been very involved with the city and the T to figure out the issues important to the neighborhood.
The Midtown site is way worse from an accessibility and interconnection standpoint. The hotel is a non factor, because there is a tract of land in between that cannot be bought or developed.
Pedestrian accessibility to the Rosedale site sucks.
All residents in the neighborhood are receiving ballots in the mail with a flyer documenting the proposal and the pros/cons. I think they're having a neighborhood meeting to count the ballots.

As a Berkeley resident, I would totally be in favor of a stop next to my neighborhood. The ability to hop on in my neighborhood and get off at the airport would be awesome.