Jump to content

Fort Worth Economic Growth - Gaining on Dallas?


Recommended Posts

Below is a link to a story by a veteran DFW TV reporter (Tracy Rowlett - CBS 11) about the potential for Fort Worth to someday rival Dallas for economic supremecy in the Metroplex - the driver being the natural gas drilling boom currently going on literally underneath Fort Worth. It's a bit of fanciful speculation - and I'm sure most folks wouldn't agree with Rowlett - but it sent some Dallasites into wild conniptions (which alone made it worth watching/reading)...

Enjoy:

http://cbs11tv.com/local/local_story_210225516.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although that article seems a little presumptuous, I loved this line: "The Barnett Shale could produce gas for many years to come. Add that to Fort Worth's better planning, and you have a city that's not only on the move, but clearly has struggling Dallas in its sights".

If you follow some of the Dallasites line of thinking, the DFW area is one happy city that's ready to take on the world. Doesn't look like that to me. At least from this guy's standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although that article seems a little presumptuous, I loved this line: "The Barnett Shale could produce gas for many years to come. Add that to Fort Worth's better planning, and you have a city that's not only on the move, but clearly has struggling Dallas in its sights".

If you follow some of the Dallasites line of thinking, the DFW area is one happy city that's ready to take on the world. Doesn't look like that to me. At least from this guy's standpoint.

I like the quote at the 4:08 mark in the video,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That editorial is so ridiculous it's laughable. It can't be real. Fort Worth is already a really unattractive, very blue collar city, so now gas wells are going to be all over the place?..Nice. And because of gas drilling Fort Worth, with its four "skyscrapers", is going to become a bigger player than economic powerhouses Houston & Dallas. Really? I'm sure Dallas is really concerned. One drive around each city and it's clear these cities are not even in the same economic leauge and probally never will be.

Edited by troyboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That editorial is so ridiculous it's laughable. It can't be real. Fort Worth is already a really unattractive, very blue collar city, so now gas wells are going to be all over the place?..Nice. And because of gas drilling Fort Worth, with its four "skyscrapers", is going to become a bigger player than economic powerhouses Houston & Dallas. Really? I'm sure Dallas is really concerned. One drive around each city and it's clear these cities are not even in the same economic leauge and probally never will be.

Like I said, conniptions...

Edited by lookinoveratya
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, conniptions...

If you want to call stating the obvious ( the different economic leauge thing is obvious, FW being a dump , industrial city is just my opinion) a conniption then feel free. I'm not even from Dallas or Texas and have no time for silly city rivalries, but I know a crazy opinion backed by not one concrete fact when I read one. Also, I found the thread on the DFW forum. It seemed to me noone really took it seriously and the thread turned into poke a few laughs at FW and Dallas, that is when it didn't wander into a totally different subject altogether. There seemed to be much more laughs over the editorial than fits.

Edited by troyboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to call stating the obvious ( the different economic leauge thing is obvious, FW being a dump , industrial city is just my opinion) a conniption then feel free. I'm not even from Dallas or Texas and have no time for silly city rivalries, but I know a crazy opinion backed by not one concrete fact when I read one. Also, I found the thread on the DFW forum. It seemed to me noone really took it seriously and the thread turned into poke a few laughs at FW and Dallas, that is when it didn't wander into a totally different subject altogether. There seemed to be much more laughs over the editorial than fits.

troyboy

Today, 11:24 AM Post #8

Group: Members

Posts: 104

Joined: Tuesday, August 9th, 2005

From: Dallas

Member No.: 1,129

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"FWD Airport"? That's rich. :rolleyes: Don't get me wrong - Ft. Worth is a very nice city on a great growth path, but if local gas fields were the key to domination, Midland-Odessa would have become the #1 megapolitan of Texas long time ago...

That's an interesting point. Fort Worth's situation may be different, though. Whereas Midland and Odessa largely exist to support the oil and gas industry which extracts those commodities from the surrounding land, Fort Worth is literally sitting on top of a good chunk of the Barnett gas field. The city itself, and many institutions and homeowners within the city, will get royalties from the extraction of gas under their property. For the city in particular, which is the largest landowner, the additional revenue will be significant. The money could be used for investment in infrastructure, economic development, or to reduce property and local sales taxes - any of which could potentially increase Fort Worth's appeal for business investment and relocations.

I'm not sure Midland and Odessa have extensive drilling for crude oil and natural gas within their city limits - maybe they do. If you review the history of Texas' crude oil boom in the early 20th century, it appears the primary beneficiaries were Dallas, Fort Worth and Houston, due to their development as the markets for equipment, engineering, transport, and capital for the newfound industry - and of course the folks who owned the mineral rights to the land being drilled in east and far west Texas.

I think that Rowlett's piece was looking towards the long future and merely raising the possibility of Fort Worth's potential given it's already strong economy and robust population growth and now the unleashing of an economic force - a big batch of highly valued natural gas underneath the city - that previously had not been in the mix.

Is it really that far fetched that Fort Worth might someday be bigger and more important than Dallas? Who would have thought 40 years ago Houston would grow to be bigger and economically stronger than Philadelphia or Detroit? And my gosh - who would have EVER thought - even 10 years ago - that San Antonio would outgrow Dallas to become Texas' second largest city.

Although I live in Austin, I think Fort Worth is pretty terrific and has a great future and often gets undeservedly bashed by folks due east. I, for one, hope Mr. Rowlett is someday vindicated...

Edited by lookinoveratya
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to call stating the obvious ( the different economic leauge thing is obvious, FW being a dump , industrial city is just my opinion) a conniption then feel free. I'm not even from Dallas or Texas and have no time for silly city rivalries, but I know a crazy opinion backed by not one concrete fact when I read one. Also, I found the thread on the DFW forum. It seemed to me noone really took it seriously and the thread turned into poke a few laughs at FW and Dallas, that is when it didn't wander into a totally different subject altogether. There seemed to be much more laughs over the editorial than fits.

I hate to break it to you TroyBoy, FW is anything but blue collar. In fact, FW has more old money than you'd ever imagine. Of course, you're here from Dallas hating on FW just to stir the pot... and we all know that. But, don't forget, some of the wealthiest families/individuals in the country live in FW. You obviously have spent way too much time in the land of over-leased $30,000-a-year millionaires than you have on the West Side of FW and you've also apparently only seen DT FW from 30 rather than actually parking and walking around. I will give you one thing - the FW skyline sucks for a city the size of FW. However, I would much rather walk around DT FW at night that walk around DT Dallas ever. DT Dallas is full of scary homeless people and criminal elements who do nothing but bug the crap out of people asking for money, etc. DT FW, on the other hand, is fully of white collar people spending money at the long list of restaurants, movie theaters, and bars. And, before you blow off FW as never being able to surpass Dallas... just remember FW has been one of the fastest growing cities in the country for the last 7 or 8 years, growing from 29th largest city to approximately 17th largest, while Dallas has enjoyed near stagnant growth and "grown" from 7th largest city to 9th. Seems to me, one of the cities is moving in one direction while the other is headed in the opposite direction. Like it or not, things are changing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me, one of the cities is moving in one direction while the other is headed in the opposite direction. Like it or not, things are changing...

Willy,

I agree with a lot of what you have to say, but I think this is stretching it a bit. Fort Worth's recent population growth is due to the Collin county part 2 to the north, and is little to nothing of what is going to make Fort Worth great (such as the Trinity project). Now, if Fort Worth were doing that with 3 or 4k people per square mile, I might agree with you. As far as raw population alone, if San Jose can pass up San Francisco, Fort Worth could definitely pass Dallas.

Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to break it to you TroyBoy, FW is anything but blue collar. In fact, FW has more old money than you'd ever imagine. Of course, you're here from Dallas hating on FW just to stir the pot... and we all know that. But, don't forget, some of the wealthiest families/individuals in the country live in FW. You obviously have spent way too much time in the land of over-leased $30,000-a-year millionaires than you have on the West Side of FW and you've also apparently only seen DT FW from 30 rather than actually parking and walking around. I will give you one thing - the FW skyline sucks for a city the size of FW. However, I would much rather walk around DT FW at night that walk around DT Dallas ever. DT Dallas is full of scary homeless people and criminal elements who do nothing but bug the crap out of people asking for money, etc. DT FW, on the other hand, is fully of white collar people spending money at the long list of restaurants, movie theaters, and bars. And, before you blow off FW as never being able to surpass Dallas... just remember FW has been one of the fastest growing cities in the country for the last 7 or 8 years, growing from 29th largest city to approximately 17th largest, while Dallas has enjoyed near stagnant growth and "grown" from 7th largest city to 9th. Seems to me, one of the cities is moving in one direction while the other is headed in the opposite direction. Like it or not, things are changing...

Willy1, have you ever been to downtown FW, besides Sundance Square? I ride my bike through downtown every Sunday morning; the homeless are sleeping on the pedestrian bridges over the Trinity, they are milling about the streets (one just recently stabbed another in front of the jail, no less), they infest the water gardens, and they are as aggressive for asking (demanding) for money as their colleagues in Dallas.

As for FW's growth, it is based on two things: Annexation and Alliance. The farmland/sprawl area around Alliance is booming, I should know, I live there. The Alliance area, not the core and not gas, is what is driving FW's growth. Well, the Alliance area did get a JCPenney and Cheddar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Willy1, have you ever been to downtown FW, besides Sundance Square? I ride my bike through downtown every Sunday morning; the homeless are sleeping on the pedestrian bridges over the Trinity, they are milling about the streets (one just recently stabbed another in front of the jail, no less), they infest the water gardens, and they are as aggressive for asking (demanding) for money as their colleagues in Dallas.

As for FW's growth, it is based on two things: Annexation and Alliance. The farmland/sprawl area around Alliance is booming, I should know, I live there. The Alliance area, not the core and not gas, is what is driving FW's growth. Well, the Alliance area did get a JCPenney and Cheddar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Willy1, have you ever been to downtown FW, besides Sundance Square? I ride my bike through downtown every Sunday morning; the homeless are sleeping on the pedestrian bridges over the Trinity, they are milling about the streets (one just recently stabbed another in front of the jail, no less), they infest the water gardens, and they are as aggressive for asking (demanding) for money as their colleagues in Dallas.

As for FW's growth, it is based on two things: Annexation and Alliance. The farmland/sprawl area around Alliance is booming, I should know, I live there. The Alliance area, not the core and not gas, is what is driving FW's growth. Well, the Alliance area did get a JCPenney and Cheddar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FW is now in striking distance of having a larger core population than San Franscisco (less than 60K difference) There's some food for thought.

That's some really unsatisfying food you're serving. You need to consider land area of cities and population density in your analysis. SF, after all is just 47 square miles. FW just about matches SF in population, but it takes about seven times as much land or 281 square miles. Chew on that. Both Dallas and Ft. Worth need to improve their density figures and worry less about overall totals.

Edited by NDtexan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's some really unsatisfying food you're serving. You need to consider land area of cities and population density in your analysis. SF, after all is just 47 square miles. FW just about matches SF in population, but it takes about seven times as much land or 281 square miles. Chew on that. Both Dallas and Ft. Worth need to improve their density figures and worry less about overall totals.

That's a personal preference issue... I personally think that having THAT many people in that close quarters is too close for comfort. Hey, I'm a Texan so I like my elbow room. That's probably why I live in DFW not SF or NYC. And, the fact that DFW is one of the least densely populated big cities isn't new news... everyone knows that. I never said anything about density. Most Sun Belt cities are sprawling cities, not dense cities... LA - Houston - DFW - Atlanta - Pheonix - even OK City... all very sprawling cities. Hey, LA is a city of sprawl... that doesn't stop it from being the second largest city in the country. Bottom line here - there are not two cities that are totally alike. But cities, like the people who live in them, do sort of follow trends. The cities along the Eastern Sea Board are older, mass transit cities. Cities in the northern midwest tend to be older industrial cities (Detroit, Chicago, etc). Cities in the NWest are typically landlocked by some sort of geographic boundary - a bay, a mountain range, etc. (Seattle, San Fran) and, Sunbelt Cities are all about the sprawl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LA's metro is denser than New York's metro.

Comparisons like these that look at municipal boundaries are pretty thoroughly flawed. Back in 2003, the Census Bureau decided to add Austin and San Jacinto Counties to the Houston Metropolitan Statistical Area, so overnight the population density of the area fell by a fair bit. It didn't reflect reality, of course.

This research paper briefly discussed density gradients, which is the preferred method of drawing comparisons of this sort between different cities. Check page one of the body of the text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

troyboy

Today, 11:24 AM Post #8

Group: Members

Posts: 104

Joined: Tuesday, August 9th, 2005

From: Dallas

Member No.: 1,129

Oh you caught me, I'm a big liar and a fraud!!...You're so smart!!! Imagine how silly I feel, claiming I'm not from Dallas when "Dallas" is right there under my name.

I'm not Dallas or Texas born, Brainiac...so therefore I have no biasis for either city and play no part in any city rivalries. I didn't think I needed to clarify any further, but now I know better. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

willy1:

I'm not stirring any pot or trying to berate your city. But sorry from what I've seen FW is more blue collar than white...by far. So there's old money in FW. I can't think of any decent sized city that doesn't have old money and wealthy families. So nothing special there. Granted I haven't spent much time in FW...I never wanted to. But from what I saw, the downtown is nice, not in a big city way, but in a small town touristy sense. The restaurants and other offerings are very middle of the road, anytown USA, with very little uniqueness or funkiness. And there's nothing wrong with that.. as it is clean, familiar and safe and brings life to DTFW. Downtown Dallas has a long way to go, but I don't want it to turn into that. There's too may chains around here already.

There's some beautiful neighborhoods on the west side and around the zoo, but the vast majority of the inner loop of FW is rundown as heck, full of industrial businesses and warehouses as is most of south FW, except the SW half aound Hulen and Byrant Irving. Which seems to have better newer housing, but once again, horrible sprawling strip centers and big parking lots. The entire Northside around the stockyards is a wasteland as is most of the Eastside. Every city has rundown areas, but FW seems to have more than its fair share. The area of the most growth, North FW , around Alliance is MOSTLY low rent sprawl at its worst....cheap subdivison after cheap subdivison. The largest boom to the FW economy in years has been Alliance which is industrial based and now the next boom to the FW economy (according to Rowlett) is gas wells.... and it's not a blue collar town?? You are still ten times more likely to see warehouses going up than office buildings in FW. When I read the business pages it seems new businesses in FW are almost always industrial in nature.

I remember the first time I visited FW, I knew nothing about it at all and my first impression was "this town is really blue collar". I'm not saying there are no white-collar jobs in FW as that would be silly. But sorry, to me and many people I've spoken to, FW gives off a very blue-collar feel

Edited by troyboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how troyboy would describe west Dallas....or how about south Dallas....or, maybe east Dallas....how about anywhere but North Dallas?

Call it what you will, but I'll take "blue collar" Fort Worth any day.

Can you read?? I said every city has it's rundown areas. I would describe these areas of Dallas much the same way, I would describe lots of Houston, Atlanta, or Chicago. As I said, all large cities have rundown, blue collar areas, but FW has more than its fair share and a general blue-collar vibe, IMO. Houston has huge industrial petroleum operations, miles of warehouse, and shipping yards but it still feels like a modern, progressive city vibe to me...Fort Worth..not so much.

You can have blue collar FW, what do I care?

Edited by troyboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
"FWD Airport"? That's rich. :rolleyes: Don't get me wrong - Ft. Worth is a very nice city on a great growth path, but if local gas fields were the key to domination, Midland-Odessa would have become the #1 megapolitan of Texas long time ago...

Uhm . . . there was a time in which Midland was the richest city per capital in the world. Look at its magnificent skyline and compare it to Tyler's or Longview's -- some other dynamic small cities in Texas.

I think water might be a problem in that part of Texas in regards to building a magapolitan area there. Texas has 40,000 square miles of sand dunes in and around that region.

The gas fields are believed to be the largest in the lower 48 states. Add to these gas fields all the warehouses and expanding manufacturing that Fort Worth covets while Dallas despises them and the smaller city has a healthier infrastructure for future growth. Dallas has lots of office buildings indeed, but they are being built from the top down on an eroding foundation of small business. This is why Dallas has millions of square feet of office space empty out during every recession while the city of Fort Worth has more of a stable economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhm . . . there was a time in which Midland was the richest city per capital in the world. Look at its magnificent skyline and compare it to Tyler's or Longview's -- some other dynamic small cities in Texas.

I think water might be a problem in that part of Texas in regards to building a magapolitan area there. Texas has 40,000 square miles of sand dunes in and around that region.

The gas fields are believed to be the largest in the lower 48 states. Add to these gas fields all the warehouses and expanding manufacturing that Fort Worth covets while Dallas despises them and the smaller city has a healthier infrastructure for future growth. Dallas has lots of office buildings indeed, but they are being built from the top down on an eroding foundation of small business. This is why Dallas has millions of square feet of office space empty out during every recession while the city of Fort Worth has more of a stable economy.

I am not sure how long these gas fields will be a boon for Fort Worth (if not detrimental - a lot of people don't want drilling in their neighborhood), but Fort Worth will continue to grow in size and prominence. Unlike Dallas, it has a lot of room to expand to the North, West, and South - and its population will continue to expand.

But with that urban growth will likely come many more of the big city problems (poverty, decay, etc) that Dallas has had to address alone for years. Maybe together they can develop better solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
I wonder if Dallas's population outgrew San Antonio's to regain its title back as Texas's 2nd largest city?

I'm betting that San Antonio is keeping pace pretty well. It includes a lot of suburban areas, especially north and west of downtown, that are still filling in with greenfield development.

But I can't really tell where they are coming up with these estimates. It certainly isn't Census data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised, but not really because people are heading back into the Inner City.

If the data is accurate, it still does not indicate that people are heading back into the Inner City. If you look at the few suburban municipalities for which data is provided and the subtract from them the amount of growth from both Dallas and Fort Worth combined, you still come up with a positive number.

But the reality is that only a few of the suburbs in the DFW area are represented in this table.

Also, Dallas has the highest rate of apartment demolition in the nation, so its net new supply of multifamily units is not really very impressive. Unless Dallas' housing vacancy rate has declined, it seems unlikely that their one-year population growth could be that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Below is a link to a story by a veteran DFW TV reporter (Tracy Rowlett - CBS 11) about the potential for Fort Worth to someday rival Dallas for economic supremecy in the Metroplex - the driver being the natural gas drilling boom currently going on literally underneath Fort Worth. It's a bit of fanciful speculation - and I'm sure most folks wouldn't agree with Rowlett - but it sent some Dallasites into wild conniptions (which alone made it worth watching/reading)...

Enjoy:

http://cbs11tv.com/local/local_story_210225516.html

The population of Fort Worth could reach a million by 2020 or there abouts. Still, one has to wonder if the tornado hitting downtown didn't have a negative effect on possible investment into new office construction. Plus, most construction is going to be mixed usage regardless. Remember, it isnt the numbers or the heights of buildings in DFW any more but the numbers of mixed usages. Fort Worth is just cool. When people prefer living next to the cooler people of Fort Worth than the arrogant people in Uptown, they will move west. It gets even cooler west of there. Possum Kingdom is paradise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possum Kingdom Lake is over an hour west of Fort Worth buddy.

Five minutes in Rode Island is an hour in Texas. Look, I've lived in Texas my whole life. I've tried to visit other places but both times my pickup broke down. But, you know, I've never had to leave because Texas has everything. There is even talk of a lost glacier up in the Pan Handle. I've been to Possum Kingdom, son. Do you realize that its dam moved a couple of inches down the Brazos River? It has the clearest water in Texas. Like I said, the place is a paradise. As the crow flies, Possum Kingdom isn't that far from Fort Worth. One has to go an around about way to get to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the real issue between the two is that Dallas is land locked and last map I saw there was about a 100' wide path of land on the south side of dallas where dallas could sneek out of its current borders and grab more land for growth and that hole has probably been plugged now which means there is zero areas around dallas for dallas to annex more property....where as Fort Worth has multiple sides of its borders to annex and expand

so even if people wanted to live in dallas there is no where to escape the equally poor schools in dallas (which is why most move away) while Fort Worth can annex into areas with decent schools and continue to grow

and any river project for Fort Worth will be right in downtown while Dallas will be putting their river project (that will probably never get off the ground) over on the western edge of the city and hope people buy out old dumps and junk yards to start redevelopment....which is extremely difficult to do especially in a place like dallas where everyone demands their "cut" for their area before anything moves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the real issue between the two is that Dallas is land locked and last map I saw there was about a 100' wide path of land on the south side of dallas where dallas could sneek out of its current borders and grab more land for growth and that hole has probably been plugged now which means there is zero areas around dallas for dallas to annex more property....where as Fort Worth has multiple sides of its borders to annex and expand

so even if people wanted to live in dallas there is no where to escape the equally poor schools in dallas (which is why most move away) while Fort Worth can annex into areas with decent schools and continue to grow

and any river project for Fort Worth will be right in downtown while Dallas will be putting their river project (that will probably never get off the ground) over on the western edge of the city and hope people buy out old dumps and junk yards to start redevelopment....which is extremely difficult to do especially in a place like dallas where everyone demands their "cut" for their area before anything moves

After the Trinity project being approved twice by the public, do you really think its going to fail? I believe much of the project is already under way at any rate.

The tollway is going to take forever, yes. That could be endangered eventually but I think the city wants it more than anything else.

Fort Worth is just cool when compared to some of the snobbish areas of Dallas. I once tried to ask a Dallas biker for directions and almost got ran over. I happened to be camping at Joe Pool lake so, yes, I probably looked like a homeless man. The city of Dallas must have the worst homeless people in the world.

I must admit that a lot of Houston doesn't exhibit this type of snobbishness because of its many Bohemian neighborhoods where wealthy houses have been built next to middle class ones. A Doctor can be living next to a computer technician while the convenience store next to him is being robbed. The Uptown area of Dallas first started out as this kind of neighborhood but its now more like a gated community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the Trinity project being approved twice by the public, do you really think its going to fail? I believe much of the project is already under way at any rate.

The tollway is going to take forever, yes. That could be endangered eventually but I think the city wants it more than anything else.

Fort Worth is just cool when compared to some of the snobbish areas of Dallas. I once tried to ask a Dallas biker for directions and almost got ran over. I happened to be camping at Joe Pool lake so, yes, I probably looked like a homeless man. The city of Dallas must have the worst homeless people in the world.

I must admit that a lot of Houston doesn't exhibit this type of snobbishness because of its many Bohemian neighborhoods where wealthy houses have been built next to middle class ones. A Doctor can be living next to a computer technician while the convenience store next to him is being robbed. The Uptown area of Dallas first started out as this kind of neighborhood but its now more like a gated community.

the fact that it had to be twice approved by the public tells me why it will fail.....because something will happen and it will need to be approved again.....and again....and then someone will find that something had changed between the last time it was approved and the time before that "and the public might not have been aware fo those changes when they last approved it" so they will need to tell everyone about those changes and then ask them to approve it again.....and then someone will want to change something else because they did not know things could be changed up after it was first approved....and someone else will want the public to approve the new changes as well.....but the public might all know about those changes when it gets approved again....and on and on it goes.....then there is a city election and new people get on the council.....all with their big egos and their desire for their area to get its cut :huh:

so far dallas has not even been able to approve the change in street name of a street filled with junk yards and vacant dump lots....there is a reason dallas is SURROUNDED by suburbs that are NOT A PART OF DALLAS.....because people that want common sense government flee dallas in droves....which leaves only the pork barrelers and the "my area" types and the no growth no new tax types

one thing I always loved about Houston.....you have to go a LONG WAY out in most cases to escape "Houston"......so people that care for the entire city are still around to vote common sense....which is why Houston had two venues and the GRB all downtown where they belong and help the whole city shine....VS other places

Edited by TexasVines
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the fact that it had to be twice approved by the public tells me why it will fail.....because something will happen and it will need to be approved again.....and again....and then someone will find that something had changed between the last time it was approved and the time before that "and the public might not have been aware fo those changes when they last approved it" so they will need to tell everyone about those changes and then ask them to approve it again.....and then someone will want to change something else because they did not know things could be changed up after it was first approved....and someone else will want the public to approve the new changes as well.....but the public might all know about those changes when it gets approved again....and on and on it goes.....then there is a city election and new people get on the council.....all with their big egos and their desire for their area to get its cut :huh:

so far dallas has not even been able to approve the change in street name of a street filled with junk yards and vacant dump lots....there is a reason dallas is SURROUNDED by suburbs that are NOT A PART OF DALLAS.....because people that want common sense government flee dallas in droves....which leaves only the pork barrelers and the "my area" types and the no growth no new tax types

one thing I always loved about Houston.....you have to go a LONG WAY out in most cases to escape "Houston"......so people that care for the entire city are still around to vote common sense....which is why Houston had two venues and the GRB all downtown where they belong and help the whole city shine....VS other places

I am certain that the political absurdity you speak of really bothers investors in Uptown. That is one reason I am so bullish on the Las Colinas area becoming the next focal point of business in the future transplanting that of Central Dallas.

The way the city of Houston allowed the Greenspoint area to decay into Gunspoint was pathetic. I guess that is a weakness of not having any zoning laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guess wrong.

See. You assume that I'm being negative. Are the people in here so used to arguing that they see every comment as negative? I used to live around Greenspoint. If the city hadn't neglected that part of town as they did, then it would probably look much different than it does now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are still a lot of businesses out at Greenspoint. Exxon Chemicals has a lot of people there.

Granted, the mall is lame. But that's the trend with malls today. They are all lame.

There may be businesses out there, but it's one of the more depressing and dangerous areas of Houston. It's the perfect example of how an edge city business center can decline so drastically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are still a lot of businesses out at Greenspoint. Exxon Chemicals has a lot of people there.

Granted, the mall is lame. But that's the trend with malls today. They are all lame.

Okay. Yes, with Rankin Rd. getting built up. There has been a lot of infill since the oil depression. Granted. My point is the neglect left the area looking far less than its potential.

Perhaps Greenspoint mall needs to be buried so that 3 or 4 mix use developments can be built there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greenspoint Mall is being converted into a giant mixed-use development.

Cool. That's exactly what needs to be done. I think the original design was "mixed abuse." Greenspoint won't ever be the equal to Las Colinas but that area plus the airport has always reminded me of something one might find in Dallas. It seems out of place down there in Houston.

Anyway, considering that it is the center of the aerospace industry in Texas and also the headquarters for the largest gas field in North America, Fort Worth isn't a suburb. I guess that is why this thread was started. One can argue also that Richardson / Plano / Addison / Farmer's Branch aren't typical suburbs with their large labor bases. Ditto Irving / Grapevine. Arlington too is approching half a million people. These urban types suburbs are different from the suburbs like Mesquite or Grand Prairie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...