Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Jefferson Ridglea Village (Calmont/30 & Bryant Irvin)


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 08 July 2021 - 08:40 PM

A group has quietly been acquiring all the homes on these 2 blocks and 1/2 the block on 2 other blocks. We now have more info on what's planned here, which is an apartment development.

From next week's upcoming zoning agenda, case no. ZC-21-088


RTIrn5c.png

This will probably be a controversial case, with a denser use coming into a single family area and will result in the demolition of ~40 homes. City staff has also recommended the zoning change be denied. 



#2 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 08 July 2021 - 09:04 PM

I will have to read up on why they are recommending denying it -- there are already some apartments to the west, and commercial to the east, and if built there would be only 1.5 blocks of single family before more commercial / Camp Bowie to the south.

 

This development is right on I30, probably not the most play-in-the-yard friendly area in the first place noise-wise.  Also it has easy access to the highway from both directions, possibly shunting extra neighborhood traffic, although again, very close to Camp Bowie also.

 

It kind of makes sense to me that the whole I30 / Camp Bowie / Bryant Irvin wedge would make a good higher density area.



#3 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 08 July 2021 - 09:14 PM

I'll save you a click

 

 

Analysis of Conceptual Site Plan: As part of the analysis of this zoning case, staff is taking into consideration the conceptual site plan submitted by the applicant. While the rezoning of this case is not bound to a site plan because it is not a Planned Development “PD” or Conditional Use Permit “CUP” case with required site plan, the nature of being a rezoning to the form-based Urban Residential “UR” district means that the entire proposal should be considered. From the “UR” Zoning Ordinance 4.713, “It is the purpose of the Urban Residential ("UR") District to provide a residential density transition zone between low density single-family neighborhoods and higher density commercial areas. An additional purpose of the UR Districts is to encourage a range of housing choices within walking distance of rail transit stations and mixed-use urban villages. The goal is to ensure compatibility between one-and-two family districts and more intense mixed-use districts and related uses. UR neighborhoods are characterized by higher density residential structures in a highly walkable urban environment. A mixture of housing types is present to provide architectural diversity, while shallow setbacks frame the pedestrian environment with engaging building façades, improve visibility and safety Page 2 of 5 of building entrances, and increase neighborhood vitality.” The intent of the “UR” development principles include promoting pedestrian-oriented urban form, buildings that front public spaces and enhance the public realm, having good creative design, promoting walkability, and maximizing connectivity and access.” The site plan does not appear to achieve many of the items contained within the “UR” purpose and intent. The proximity to the Camp Bowie Corridor and Growth Center allow for nearby commercial uses within a walkable distance of the site. The proximity to Camp Bowie and the commercial uses support the higher density associated with “UR” zoning. The image below shows the Camp Bowie Form-Based District “CB” in hot pink. The site of the rezoning is in orange with thick black outline

The proposed site plan fails to address several intents of “UR” zoning. Based on the proposed site plan, replatting would be required. It appears that the developer plans to vacate Malvey Avenue, thus doing away with the traditional grid-pattern that is inherent to creating a pedestrian oriented form. In addition, the site design will make Little Page Street and Malvey Avenue read and feel like private, internal roads rather than the public streets. The proposed vacation and redesigning of Malvey Avenue and Little Page Street decreases through traffic, placing more pressure on Bryant Irvin Road and Halloran Street. The vacation and character change do not increase the vitality of the public realm or promote maximal connectivity and access, all of which are intents of “UR” zoning. The Commissioners have previously expressed concerns about Stormwater and potential flooding when a site will become more densely developed. The site is approximately 11 acres, and will require a Stormwater study. The form-based nature of the “UR” product means the ordinance is tied with different subdivision regulations and development/design standards that are intertwined with the land use and zoning. The form-based district functions in a way that infrastructure drives the streetscape, which drives the width of the road, which impacts the building setbacks and height, and therefore the design and use of the site. The principles of urban design are based on the spatial characteristics of the built environment working with each other; block lengths, street connections, and interaction with the surrounding and existing land uses are all important aspects to consider in a “UR” rezoning request. Page 3 of 5 The proposed site plan fails to meet the intent of the Urban Residential zoning; therefore, staff is not supportive of the current rezoning request. 



#4 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 09 July 2021 - 01:18 PM

Thanks for providing the info -- it kind of seems like it is more about design specifics than it is the general principle.

 

I know that it does happen on some projects, but it would be nice for all developers to have working sessions early and often with the city to keep things on track from the start instead of having back-to-the-drawing-board moments from rejections.

 

I expect different groups take different approaches, to either make the time to do this, or to draw it all up and ask for and try to get forgiveness at some later point.



#5 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 09 July 2021 - 07:18 PM

I don't think I'm feelin' this one.

7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#6 Crestline

Crestline

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 11 July 2021 - 08:41 AM

 

I'll save you a click

 

 

Analysis of Conceptual Site Plan: As part of the analysis of this zoning case, staff is taking into consideration the conceptual site plan submitted by the applicant. While the rezoning of this case is not bound to a site plan because it is not a Planned Development “PD” or Conditional Use Permit “CUP” case with required site plan, the nature of being a rezoning to the form-based Urban Residential “UR” district means that the entire proposal should be considered. From the “UR” Zoning Ordinance 4.713, “It is the purpose of the Urban Residential ("UR") District to provide a residential density transition zone between low density single-family neighborhoods and higher density commercial areas. An additional purpose of the UR Districts is to encourage a range of housing choices within walking distance of rail transit stations and mixed-use urban villages. The goal is to ensure compatibility between one-and-two family districts and more intense mixed-use districts and related uses. UR neighborhoods are characterized by higher density residential structures in a highly walkable urban environment. A mixture of housing types is present to provide architectural diversity, while shallow setbacks frame the pedestrian environment with engaging building façades, improve visibility and safety Page 2 of 5 of building entrances, and increase neighborhood vitality.” The intent of the “UR” development principles include promoting pedestrian-oriented urban form, buildings that front public spaces and enhance the public realm, having good creative design, promoting walkability, and maximizing connectivity and access.” The site plan does not appear to achieve many of the items contained within the “UR” purpose and intent. The proximity to the Camp Bowie Corridor and Growth Center allow for nearby commercial uses within a walkable distance of the site. The proximity to Camp Bowie and the commercial uses support the higher density associated with “UR” zoning. The image below shows the Camp Bowie Form-Based District “CB” in hot pink. The site of the rezoning is in orange with thick black outline

The proposed site plan fails to address several intents of “UR” zoning. Based on the proposed site plan, replatting would be required. It appears that the developer plans to vacate Malvey Avenue, thus doing away with the traditional grid-pattern that is inherent to creating a pedestrian oriented form. In addition, the site design will make Little Page Street and Malvey Avenue read and feel like private, internal roads rather than the public streets. The proposed vacation and redesigning of Malvey Avenue and Little Page Street decreases through traffic, placing more pressure on Bryant Irvin Road and Halloran Street. The vacation and character change do not increase the vitality of the public realm or promote maximal connectivity and access, all of which are intents of “UR” zoning. The Commissioners have previously expressed concerns about Stormwater and potential flooding when a site will become more densely developed. The site is approximately 11 acres, and will require a Stormwater study. The form-based nature of the “UR” product means the ordinance is tied with different subdivision regulations and development/design standards that are intertwined with the land use and zoning. The form-based district functions in a way that infrastructure drives the streetscape, which drives the width of the road, which impacts the building setbacks and height, and therefore the design and use of the site. The principles of urban design are based on the spatial characteristics of the built environment working with each other; block lengths, street connections, and interaction with the surrounding and existing land uses are all important aspects to consider in a “UR” rezoning request. Page 3 of 5 The proposed site plan fails to meet the intent of the Urban Residential zoning; therefore, staff is not supportive of the current rezoning request. 

 

 

I have never read about UR Districts before. I gather that this developer is proposing to rezone this land into an UR District in the context of building this conceptual site plan? If so, I agree with this analysis that the conceptual site plan fails to meet UR District requirements in a few ways, but it does seem to me that a better plan that did meet those requirements would be good to build here. In my opinion density is good and pulling older single family homes off of the interstate highway is good, so hopefully something UR District-compatible will be built here soon.



#7 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:(pronounced
    na-tix-o-pee)

Posted 11 July 2021 - 12:55 PM

Does it bother anyone else that JPI uses "Jefferson" front and center in all of their property names?  I understand the importance of brand identity but you would think "A Jefferson Property" could be listed a subset to the chosen branded apartment theme (Ridglea Village, River East etc).  It's sort of confusing as mention in previous threads to see Jefferson shown first in name when it really means very little to anyone but the developer.

 

http://jpi.com/communities/



#8 Crestline

Crestline

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 12 July 2021 - 06:04 AM

Brand equity / recognition is huge in some sectors, like consumer packaged goods, but I doubt it matters much in rental real estate. I've lived in a dozen apartment complexes over the years and I can't remember the branding of any of them, and even if I did I don't think I'd assume the good qualities travel with the brand between properties. So yeah, JPI can probably knock it off.  :lol:



#9 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 15 July 2021 - 03:30 PM

This actually passed without opposition. The developer has been assembling the land since the 1950s. 

zcRHGzJ.png

 

MUBXcXI.png

 

M0HaM1C.pngkvIAOj1.png



#10 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 15 July 2021 - 03:50 PM

This actually passed without opposition. The developer has been assembling the land since the 1950s. 

zcRHGzJ.png

 

MUBXcXI.png

 

M0HaM1C.pngkvIAOj1.png

NO opposition?

That's surprising. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#11 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 830 posts

Posted 15 July 2021 - 03:57 PM

Glad it passed

 

Look nice an a lot better than what is there now 



#12 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 15 July 2021 - 04:21 PM

Is it supposed to have retail?  From some of the renderings there seems to be a lot of pedestrians if it won't have retail.



#13 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:(pronounced
    na-tix-o-pee)

Posted 15 July 2021 - 05:46 PM

Wow!? Thanks for grabbing those renderings from the presentation. Same dev as River East.are you seeing any similarities?

#14 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 15 July 2021 - 06:27 PM

Glad it passed

 

Look nice an a lot better than what is there now 

I am a great admirer of mid-century/sixties architecture. My home is 63yo and because we have kept it up, we repeatedly get complimented for how nice it looks both interior and exterior.

 

I think that the removal of these houses present an opportunity for people who may be looking for a house to have a house from this project moved to a lot.  I think with the prices and shortage of houses, this could make sense for some buyers.

 

I would definitely recommend an inquiry be made.



#15 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:(pronounced
    na-tix-o-pee)

Posted 15 July 2021 - 07:21 PM

I would be curious how loud the freeway is inside those old houses? I personally could not handle facing the freeway even with noise reduction windows in the new construction.

#16 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 15 July 2021 - 10:21 PM

Is it supposed to have retail?  From some of the renderings there seems to be a lot of pedestrians if it won't have retail.

Residential only. 



#17 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 15 July 2021 - 10:23 PM

Wow!? Thanks for grabbing those renderings from the presentation. Same dev as River East.are you seeing any similarities?

A little bit, but I'd say the biggest similarity is the architect. WDG also did the Kelton at Clearfork, and this looks like it'll be pretty similar with a blend of classic styling over multiple blocks. 



#18 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 15 July 2021 - 10:24 PM

No covered parking :unsure:.

 

Wait a minute. Just saw the renderings for tucked away garages.



#19 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,864 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 15 July 2021 - 11:00 PM

Lots of land under pavement. Storm water runoff mitigation?



#20 txbornviking

txbornviking

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,204 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 16 July 2021 - 07:49 AM

I would be curious how loud the freeway is inside those old houses? I personally could not handle facing the freeway even with noise reduction windows in the new construction.

 

as somehow who owns a home originally built in 1946 that backs up to the access road to I-30, as for highway noise I can tell you outside the home, in the backyard, the average dB level tends to run 50-55dB from highway noise, typically with spikes up to the 70-75dB range. (i recently took a lot of 60sec surveys of sound levels). 2 or 3 times a day a LOUD car or truck or whatnot will race by and sounds will go to the 80-90db level.

inside though, with the exception of those VERY loud passing vehicles, the noise level is no different than any other home I've been in, if you can hear the AC running with a slight hum as air blows into a room, it's basically like that all the time.

 

if you move one or two blocks further from the highway the sound levels drop off quite quickly, average ambient dB level in those blocks was in the 40-45db range which is also the same I have measured in the past while walking in Rivercrest or Monticello areas (being a logarithmic scale, 10dB represents a doubling of loudness)



#21 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:(pronounced
    na-tix-o-pee)

Posted 16 July 2021 - 08:48 AM

 

I would be curious how loud the freeway is inside those old houses? I personally could not handle facing the freeway even with noise reduction windows in the new construction.

 

as somehow who owns a home originally built in 1946 that backs up to the access road to I-30, as for highway noise I can tell you outside the home, in the backyard, the average dB level tends to run 50-55dB from highway noise, typically with spikes up to the 70-75dB range. (i recently took a lot of 60sec surveys of sound levels). 2 or 3 times a day a LOUD car or truck or whatnot will race by and sounds will go to the 80-90db level.

inside though, with the exception of those VERY loud passing vehicles, the noise level is no different than any other home I've been in, if you can hear the AC running with a slight hum as air blows into a room, it's basically like that all the time.

 

if you move one or two blocks further from the highway the sound levels drop off quite quickly, average ambient dB level in those blocks was in the 40-45db range which is also the same I have measured in the past while walking in Rivercrest or Monticello areas (being a logarithmic scale, 10dB represents a doubling of loudness)

 

 

I appreciate your scientific approach to this.  I notice freeway traffic noise to be louder in winter than in summer.  I had assumed it was related to trees without leaves attenuating the soundwave energy as well as the air temperature perhaps.  Any thoughts?

 

Here's a few other involuntary factors I found doing a quick search online....

 

Habituation: Habituation is a decrease in response to a stimulus after repeated presentations. For example, a novel sound in your environment, such as a new ring tone, may initially draw your attention or even become distracting. After you become accustomed to this sound, you pay less attention to the noise and your response to the sound will diminish. This diminished response is habituation.

 

Desensitized: to make somebody/something less aware of something, especially a problem or something bad, by making them become used to it. (aka Tuning out)

 

I thought my old dogs had tuned me out a while back or were desensitized to the sound of my voice...turns out they just lost their hearing.  Key advantage, they fall into a deep sleep where every little noise doesn't wake them anymore, but I sometimes need to physically nudge them to wake them up.



#22 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 16 July 2021 - 09:53 AM

Most traffic noise is from the tires' interface with the road.  When things are cold, that noise is greater.  In addition, when there is warmer air above colder air at ground level, the sound will bend down more as it travels horizontally.

 

We wrote about this kind of thing in this thread a good while back:

 

http://www.fortworth...858#entry119592



#23 txbornviking

txbornviking

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,204 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 16 July 2021 - 10:35 AM

you are both correct that in the winter the ambient sound levels do increase, 3-5dB from what I've measured.

less vegetation is why you notice it more since the lack of leaves in trees means less sound absorption and yes, the majority of sound does come from tire friction. colder weather does mean firmer tires and more noise generated as well.

 

"noise reducing" asphalt is something that can be used by highway departments, but rarely is. From things I've read/seen elsewhere it seems the higher cost will get you a 3-5dB reduction in sound, but here is more info.

http://asphaltmagazi...ding-the-issue/

 

(didn't mean to derail the Jefferson conversation)

I do think the larger building masses along the highway and access road though will do a very good job of working to lessen the impact of highway noise on the more "traditional" adjoining neighborhood



#24 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 16 July 2021 - 10:36 AM

Now that I had the time for the JRV project to sink in, I'm not liking it as much as I thought when the renderings were unveiled.

 

Jefferson, Inc. has not evolved in its concept of multi-family residential units.  For as long as I can remember, JI has built these mammoth projects with huge swaths of pavement for cars.  On the occasions that I have been on the site of them, cars are parked everywhere, and sometimes they are in need of repairs, etc.

 

JRV is replacing essential green spots (houses/yards) with a massive asphalt surface which will contribute to flash runoffs during heavy rain and create yet another heat spot for the neighborhood.  Where is all the runoff to go when at this time it is absorbed by the lawns that exist there today.

 

This approval was done so swiftly without it seems a consideration of the impact that JRV will have in that neighborhood.

 

JRV is just a shiner example of what happened in Eastchase.



#25 txbornviking

txbornviking

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,204 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 16 July 2021 - 12:07 PM

I'd love to see greater adoption of permeable paving surfaces for parking lots, but on the other hand I do have questions about leeching into the soil from oil drippings etc
(I'll admit I'm not well enough educated on that as being a valid concern or not)



#26 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 16 July 2021 - 04:14 PM

Glad it passed

 

Look nice an a lot better than what is there now 

 

These kinds of development axacerbates the impending problems stemming from climate change.  Unprecedented flooding in Germany, Japan, Belgium just this month. 

 

The City must get serious about the flooding and drainage situations that we are going to begin facing right now.  I understand that P&Z was recommending a denial but within hours JPV there seems a 180 degrees turn about that granted a swift approval. IMO, JRV is using its stale playbook of the 70's and 80's.  I would hope that  before received approval, that it be mandated that project should replace green space/surface parking at a 1:1 ratio.  At least the project would not be reducing the important ecosystem that absorbed rain and prevents flash flooding and taxes the drainage/sewer system.

 

So a big No for it being better than what is there now.

 



#27 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 09 August 2021 - 04:55 PM

I'd love to see greater adoption of permeable paving surfaces for parking lots, but on the other hand I do have questions about leeching into the soil from oil drippings etc
(I'll admit I'm not well enough educated on that as being a valid concern or not)

I'm on board with this but offer the developer a bonus/incentive to include permeable paving.

Same to encourage density in walkable places.



#28 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 28 November 2021 - 03:18 PM

The whole area appears to have been vacated. Most of the homes are now boarded up.



#29 steave

steave

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 139 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bryant Irvin + Vickery

Posted 19 December 2021 - 02:08 PM

Too much surface parking, IMO. But at least its a significant net increase in number of housing units.



#30 janderson01

janderson01

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ridgmar/Ridglea

Posted 11 February 2022 - 04:12 PM

I am curious how the I30 expansion project will affect this proposal.  



#31 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:(pronounced
    na-tix-o-pee)

Posted 14 May 2022 - 09:03 PM

Update on Jefferson Village project from April's UDC meeting:

 

https://www.fortwort...32022-final.pdf

 

Request: Waiver of Tree Preservation Requirement: The applicant requests a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Urban Forestry Ordinance for a waiver of the 25% tree preservation requirement.

greC9L7.png

 

UYmlo5t.png

 

9uIVSxV.png



#32 steave

steave

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 139 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bryant Irvin + Vickery

Posted 06 August 2022 - 01:01 PM

It looks like the site is mostly clear with a lot of dirt moving. Can't tell about the trees, not really concerned either way.

 

I still think this has too much surface parking and won't be an appealing place to live. Do you really want an apartment that overlooks a big parking lot? Also because it's not gated and the pool is out in the open there is going to be conflict between residents and nonresidents who come in.



#33 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,884 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 06 August 2022 - 02:50 PM

Even if it's out in the open, it has to be fenced and I would assume it would have a gate with some sort of access control.



#34 steave

steave

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 139 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bryant Irvin + Vickery

Posted 06 August 2022 - 02:58 PM

Sure, of course.

 

It still feels like a deconstructed apartment complex than a neighborhood though. They should have built denser donut apartments here instead. I wonder if it's just a matter of zoning, I bet the developer would have come away with a bigger return on their investment if they were allowed to. I'm not originally from FW and only just moved to this area so I don't know what you officially call that area around Camp Bowie, Bryant Irvin, and I-30 but it seems like it could be like a small urban center. I just discovered the other day while playing with Google Maps date slider that apparently across from Tom Thumb there was a multistory department store taking up the whole block. Wild.



#35 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,512 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 06 August 2022 - 04:26 PM

I don't want to hijack this thread, but the department store you are referring was Stripling & Cox.  The latter version of the store was created by a merger of two of Fort Worth's big department stores in 1981, W.C. Stripling & Co. (a.k.a. Stripling's) and R.E. Cox & Co. (a.k.a. Cox's).  At one time, both were Downtown department stores.  Stripling & Cox closed in 2007, and it was the last of the hometown department stores.



#36 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:(pronounced
    na-tix-o-pee)

Posted 31 August 2022 - 01:32 PM

Jefferson Ridglea Village Leasing Office and Amenity Space hits TDLR:

 

https://www.tdlr.tex.../TABS2022027474

 

PROJECT
Project Name: Jefferson Ridglea Village
Project Number: TABS2022027474
Facility Name: Jefferson Ridglea Village
Location Address: 5837 Calmont Avenue
Fort Worth, TX 76107
Location County: Tarrant
Start Date: 10/3/2022
Completion Date: 12/13/2024
Estimated Cost: $1,400,000
Type of Work: New Construction
Type of Funds: This project is privately funded, on private land for private use.
Scope of Work: New construction of Leasing and Amenity space for a new construction multifamily development
Square Footage: 8,000 ft 2
Are the private funds provided by the tenant?
No
Current Status:
Project Registered
 
PERSON FILING FORM
Contact Name:
Juan Sanford
 
OWNER
Owner Name:
Jefferson Ridglea Village, LLC
Owner Address:
600 Las Colinas Blvd Suite 1800
Irving, Texas 75039
 
TENANT
Not Assigned
 
DESIGN FIRM
Design Firm Name:
WDG ARchitecture Dallas, PLLC
Design Firm Address:
2001 Bryan Street Suite 3100
Dallas, Texas 75201


#37 Nitixope

Nitixope

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:(pronounced
    na-tix-o-pee)

Posted 12 September 2022 - 12:12 PM

Jefferson Ridglea Village New Building Permits Filed 9/9/22:

 

Bryant Building:

https://accela.fortw...ShowInspection=

 

West Building:

https://accela.fortw...ShowInspection=

 

Townhouse Building 1:

https://accela.fortw...ShowInspection=

 

Townhouse Building 2:

https://accela.fortw...ShowInspection=

 

Townhouse Building 3:

https://accela.fortw...ShowInspection=

 

Townhouse Building 4:

https://accela.fortw...ShowInspection=



#38 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 12 September 2022 - 11:29 PM

Sure, of course.

 

It still feels like a deconstructed apartment complex than a neighborhood though. They should have built denser donut apartments here instead. I wonder if it's just a matter of zoning, I bet the developer would have come away with a bigger return on their investment if they were allowed to. I'm not originally from FW and only just moved to this area so I don't know what you officially call that area around Camp Bowie, Bryant Irvin, and I-30 but it seems like it could be like a small urban center. I just discovered the other day while playing with Google Maps date slider that apparently across from Tom Thumb there was a multistory department store taking up the whole block. Wild.

You're not wrong.  It does seems logical that in the future that little NH could evolve to become a more walkable, moderate density neighborhood from Bryant Irvin east to Horne, south to Camp Bowie.  Could see how that could happen - not "perfect urbanism", but good enough.  Looking at the existing retail buildings, the 24 hour fitness, Lovell & Locke retail buildings are all really close. 

 

The site plan for the 24 Hr Fitness/ Boulevard of Greens building is really awful.  Its as though nobody (i.e. developer or civil engineer who drew it) ever considered that someone might actually try to walk across the site.  Would like to know which civil engineering company laid out this parking lot to heap shame upon them (joking...sort of).  

 

(tried inserting a photo & failed - how do you do that??)

 

The density of this (above site plan) is about 37 units/acre.  That is very low density by today's standards. 

I'd guess its one of two reasons (or both) they are keeping it low density with surface parking:

1) they got feedback from the surrounding neighborhoods that they'd receive strong opposition to rezoning if they went higher (elevation or density),

2) they don't think they can achieve strong enough rents in this location to justify the additional cost of structured parking. 



#39 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 27 September 2022 - 09:21 PM

Aerial view of the cleared site:

 

7hnZ1tc.jpg

 

The site itself actually falls into the JRB's no fly zone, but the zone ends just about a quarter mile to the East, which is why this view is from farther away than usual.



#40 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,512 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 27 September 2022 - 09:43 PM

When did you take this picture?  Depending on the day and time, I might have been in my office.  You did catch my building in the photograph.



#41 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 28 September 2022 - 08:30 AM

I really like the picture for the way that it compresses the all of the places along the length of Camp Bowie that I have been past so many times in my life.



#42 txbornviking

txbornviking

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,204 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 09 November 2022 - 12:33 PM

I wish I could have snapped a photo, but yesterday I was driving near this site and saw A TON of what looked like drainage infrastructure pipes stacked up and laying around ready.... maybe I'll be able to swing over and give an actual look this next weekned.



#43 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,512 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 09 November 2022 - 01:14 PM

I drove by there, also.  You are correct in that there were many large round pipes sitting on the site.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users