Jan 26, 2010
West 7th and the Importance of Place
By: Kevin Buchanan
The always-interesting Dallas urbanism blog Car Free in Big D did a story looking out west at one of our own urban infill areas, the 7th Street corridor, and has some great insight into what makes some of these developments more successful in creating a meaningful urban space than others. In short, the West 7th development by Cypress Equities has succeeded in this goal to a greater extent than neighboring Museum Place, So7, or (by a wide margin) Montgomery Plaza, because it’s the only one that manages to feel like an actual place thus far:
The plan at the W. 7th project creates its primary “place,” one street parallel to 7th. You could say that this is a mistake from a theoretical standpoint, but as I stated in another recent post, it is a necessary compromise. The primary concern must be to build enough critical mass to create a “place” from Day 1, something that holds together. This, to date, has been the inherent flaw in the neighboring project Museum Place, which one might argue has the superior architecture.
The plan and design at W. 7th understood all of these issues. The potential of the future, but the necessity to hedge bets if 7th was never fully to become a street designed as both link and place.
Seeing that 7th currently is not a street designed for people (who would live on it right now?), they’ve done exactly what they should have done, not completely turn its back on 7th, but ingratiate itself with the grid as well as to design flexibility and adaptability of the building to interact w/ 7th in a way that can change hand-in-hand as 7th evolves. Success now. And predictably moreso in the future.
Once 7th is redesigned as a more pedestrian-friendly, complete street, it has the opportunity to be a “place” itself – as streets can be either links or places themselves.
It’s a long and thoughtful post, with much written on the principals of urban convergence and the creation of place. It echoes our own thoughts here at Fort Worthology: by and large, we prefer the architecture of Museum Place over all the other 7th Street developments. What’s been built at Museum Place so far is clean, attractive, and distinctive. However, at the moment, the West 7th development feels more successful, because it’s the only one that feels like an actual place. It encloses, it interacts, and it enlivens in a way that none of the other 7th Street projects have managed to do thus far. So7’s still a bit deserted (and as a whole is noticeably less “connected” to its surroundings since the only ways in and out are from 7th Street itself, with the exception of connections from Trinity Park), Montgomery Plaza doesn’t even attempt to create any sort of successful streetscape or interesting placemaking, instead turning itself solely to the car at the expense of all other users (the sole successful part of MP from this perspective is the brief passage between the two halves of the old Montgomery Ward building itself), and Museum Place, despite its architectural quality, is still missing a large part of its built environment thanks to the vacant lots between the “head” of the development at the big University/7th/Camp Bowie/Bailey intersection and the “back” of the development, the condo/7-11 building further down 7th. With at least some rumblings that the next phases of Museum Place are at last in the works, that development could very well turn out similar to the feel of West 7th, as the site plan of Museum Place in a fully built-out condition is indeed also very impressive from a placemaking sort of perspective.
Car Free in Big D also touches on another part of the 7th Street developments – that they are, at least for the time being, virtually self-contained “islands” in the overall 7th Street development. By themselves, West 7th, Museum Place (more built-out), and So7 are each very walkable, livable developments. They’re isolated from each other both by older non-connecting development and especially by 7th Street itself. Even as new development occurs around it, 7th itself remains the over-engineered, high-speed, barren corridor it has been for decades. Walking between the various new developments, as they are obviously designed to support and encourage that activity (except for Montgomery Plaza), is a perilous and unpleasant experience of dodging speeding vehicles, negotiating tiny sidewalks, crossing seven lanes of blank pavement, and having to get around at only a mere handful of remotely safe crossing spots. It is no wonder that Cypress created West 7th first as a place centered around Crockett, because 7th itself is nowhere near being the sort of attractive place that the city might like to think of it as. We’ve heard some talk of the city building a skybridge over 7th to allow people to cross it safely, which strikes us as absurd. The city has already done one streetscape taming – that of Lancaster Avenue – and is preparing for another on Rosedale in the Near Southside. Instead of a skybridge to further cede 7th to a lifetime of being a traffic sewer, 7th could instead be recreated as a grand avenue. Wider sidewalks, on-street parking, and perhaps a center median with pedestrian shelters. More traffic lights to allow safer crossings. Obviously, the street needs to be able to accommodate vehicles as well, but if the city is serious about 7th being a successful Urban Village (it is one of the designated UVs in the city’s plans), it needs to be about more than simply funneling cars as quickly as possible. We could imagine a remade 7th being similar in some ways to the plans to re-narrow Rosedale – four lanes for traffic flow, turn lanes at intersections, better medians, better sidewalks, on-street parking, and bike lanes (7th is shown as a street the city wants dedicated bike lanes on in the Bike Fort Worth plan). The four-lane configuration can move more cars than one might think, and some commuter flow could easily shift to the far less-used Lancaster Avenue just a few blocks south (look at the traffic on 7th vs. Lancaster during rush hour – Lancaster is capable of supporting far more traffic than it does now, and goes to virtually the same places as 7th). Take advantage of the presence of multiple routes rather than just expect 7th to be a high-speed funnel forever.
Until that day, we hope the other 7th Street developments can integrate into the framework of the district as well as West 7th has been able to. The economy has slowed the pace of construction and tenant leasing at Museum Place and So7 but there’s talk of things to come at both developments.
Very well said. Transportation, saftey, and accessibility are just as much a part of any “village” as the structures placed upon it.
Ever read “A Pattern Language”? Touches on a lot of this discussion in a very accessible manner: http://www.amazon.com/Pattern-Language-Buildings-Construction-Environmental/dp/0195019199/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264524542&sr=8-1
Great post. I couldn’t agree with you more. Montgomery Plaza itself is an enjoyable space for me but opening it up to the parking lot with Target at the end was a bad idea. Walking from the Montgomery building to the Target is a walk through a parking lot, which no one does.
Hear! Hear! Narrowing W 7th to 4 lanes in either direction, landscaping a center-left turn lane and providing on street parking as well as bike lanes will do wonders for this corridor. While all that takes time and effort – an easy thing would be for the T to put at least one bus stop along the W7 development. Currently, there is one near University and then not another until east past Backwoods/Pour House. It’s a long walk and prevents transit users from accessing the W7 shops, movies, gym, etc.
Good words bro. I live just behind the Museum Place dev. and I love the area but West 7th itself is a mess. And if Mont Plaza has any chance of saving itself they need to chop up a few acres of parking lot and put in some greenspace or something to make it walkable/bike-able.
Yes, a clear, attractive sidewalk should be built connecting Target to the front. The current one is just an ADA compliant afterthought. Clearly Target drove that site design and the developer (from Plano I believe) never considered that people might actually walk or cycle to Target or any of the junior anchor stores. Unfortunately I will bet that the tenants’ leases would make it difficult to remove much if any of the parking stalls without amending many of the leases.
West 7th development is great, 7th Street itself needs some work, and Montgomery Plaza needs to convert some of their crazy massive parking lots into mixed use buildings–maybe do a donut–parking garage surrounded by good buildings in the middle. If they’d made the development behind the Montgomery Wards building with a street grid, buildings, street parking, and garages (maybe something like Southlake Town Square) it would be a much better development.
complete street. aherm… protected bike lanes. cough cough… did somebody hear something?
Yes, all of these statements are true and correct. Fort Worth was never into being correct for doing the right thing, but the way progress has come in the last couple of years, I think it is great!
It is easy to complain or voice dissatisfaction to the developments along West Seventh or nearby, but take a walk down memory lane and look what finally was eliminated and ask yourself do we want to go move back the clock and stay stagnant? I think a good analogy is the way downtown Fort Worth looked in the late 70’s, before the arrival of trees, pedestrian ways, resturants,night clubs and people. West Seventh will see that change and people who have toiled will make sure nothing goes array. Fort Worth was never into being correct for doing the right thing, but the way progress has come in the last couple of years, I think it is great!
Nobody said they wanted to go back to what was there before – rather that we wanted the new to be better linked and integrated and the whole turned into a real, thriving place, rather than some isolated developments separated by whizzing traffic.
Kevin,
What do they mean by “actual place”? Montgomery Plaza is NOT an actual place? The relationships I have developed over the past four years working at the Plaza are not “actual relationships”? The people working and living at the Plaza are not IN an “actual place”? That was opinion they were espousing, right? Those “Car Free” guys, I mean. I think the Plaza is awesome, as is all the development that has taken place over the past six years. SIX years! Give it time, there is a lot left to do, but holy cow! NOT an actual place? Come on…..
Calvin King
Store Manager
Starbucks Coffee Company at Montgomery Plaza
Could not agree more on this issue. The people driving through from 7th Street to Target at high rates of speed make it dangerous for pedestrians to walk even across the street from Starbucks to Pei Wei or from Boomer Jack’s to Gloria’s. Crosswalks at frequent intervals on 7th Street so that you can cross from the north side of the street to the south side of the street seem like a good idea, and one that would promote safety of the patrons of all the new businesses.
I agree with Calvin.
The Plaza + Pour House + Shamrock area is a successful ‘place’
1. That is where the action is.
Look at all of the pedestrians crossing 7th between those 3 locations. Foot traffic and car traffic are objective measures of a successful ‘place’.
2. The Plaza + PourHouse + Shamrock EMBRACES 7th street, contributing to the success of the entire corridor.
West 7th has EXCLUDED itself (walled itself) away 7th Street.
3. The Plaza provides a much wider range of services to residents: Grocery, Mass Merchandise, Pet Care, Clothing, Furniture, Restaurants, Dry Cleaning, Banking, Dental etc…
A successful ‘place’ needs to fully serve the needs of its neighborhood.
West 7th has not “walled itself away” from 7th Street. It has created a critical mass on Crockett, because that street is much more conducive to it, but it also has plenty of space fronting 7th itself for when that street improves. That was one of the key parts of Car Free in Big D’s post. There is as much retail space fronting 7th as there is fronting Crockett, if not more.
Montgomery Plaza does many things, but “embrace” 7th Street isn’t one of them. It separates the streetscape from itself with parking lots, barrier shrubbery between it and the sidewalks, few safe pedestrian access points, etc. It in no way “embraces” 7th even nearly as much as West 7th, So7, or Museum Place do with their wider sidewalks, easy pedestrian access, tree/lighting psychological barriers between traffic and pedestrians, etc. There is absolutely no comparison between walking along 7th in the West 7th development and walking along 7th in front of Montgomery Plaza, let alone walking across the huge parking lot behind the building to reach the grocery store (what should be an easy walking trip from neighboring residential development, given the distances, is turned rather unpleasant by 7th Street’s lacking pedestrian infrastructure and Montgomery Plaza’s car-centric design).
As for the pedestrian traffic between the Pour House and Shamrock – people obviously do walk between those places, but the pedestrian experience of doing so is far from what it could be. People run across 7th trying to get out of the way of the various directions of seldom-yielding cars. And of course, the problems with 7th Street-as-traffic-sewer-rather-than-a-place-of-its-own extend far beyond just the walking trip between the Pour House and Shamrock. The street is nowhere near set up as a place that accommodates people and cars on an anywhere close to equally pleasant footing, which is something of importance as the city has designated it as a place of walkable, mixed-use urban growth – the entire point of the city’s Urban Village program which 7th is a part of (not to mention the entire point of this site as well).
Kevin,
First off, I really enjoyed this post. Sure few people like the parking directly in front of Montgomery plaza, but just out of curiosity, is there any way to fix that? Since it is such an old building and was built a little set back from the street, is there any way to bring it to closer to 7th street?
Kevin,
There’s no way to bring the building closer (at least, no remotely practical way). That being said, there are still alternatives.
When the building was originally built, there was no parking lot in front of it despite the wide setback. The building originally featured a plaza & grass sort of space in front of it on either side of the walk leading up to the main entrance. This can be seen in this Jack White Collection card:
http://fortwortharchitecture.com/oldftw/montgomeryward1930.jpg
In the best case in my opinion, the building’s redevelopment would have created a new plaza space in front of the building. What would have wound up being more appropriate for modern needs would have been a hardscape plaza rather than a very grassy one, most likely – it would have created huge spaces for outdoor dining and other activities, and would have had an almost European-like feel. The plaza could have blended seamlessly into wide sidewalks up on the street, which would have been lined along the curb with street trees, lights, etc. as is the preferred way to do so in urban settings (this provides a buffer between pedestrians and cars).
Even with the parking in front as it is now, though, there are still many things that could be done. For example – the landscaping of Montgomery Plaza currently is very suburban in nature. That is, it’s mainly intended to look “pretty,” rather than be attractive *and* serve a functional purpose. The presence of trees and lights on the side of the sidewalk *away* from the street is one example – these don’t help to create a psychological buffer for pedestrians. In addition, the numerous shrubs between the building and the sidewalk impair pedestrian access.
Say we keep the parking – not necessarily what I’d like to see, but now that it’s here it’s not likely going anywhere any time soon – then there are still things that could be done differently. Replace the tiny, winding, suburban strip mall-style sidewalks with wide sidewalks and curbside trees, lights, and other furnishings. This would immediately create a more effective pedestrian experience and would help link the property to the more urban developments occurring and yet to be built. Remove or redesign the suburban-style shrubbery blocking the building from the sidewalk – at the least, create numerous pedestrian passages through the plant wall.
Then, I’d do some more clearly defined and safer paths from the sidewalk to the building itself. For example, something like raised crosswalks. Give pedestrians a clearly delineated, safe path rather than just dumping them into a parking lot. Creating them raised would help encourage car traffic in the lot to slow down and be more likely to yield to people crossing.
(Quasi-related: given that the city has plans for bike lanes on 7th, it might also be a good idea to install lots of bike parking along the retail tenant entrances.)
Improving the sidewalk design, pedestrian access, and pedestrian crossings would be relatively very simple changes that would help – even if they were only along 7th (and perhaps also on the part of Carroll that faces the old building). They would immediately create a more pleasant and positive experience for people walking to and from the development (which will be more and more likely as more residents are added around it and in it), and it wouldn’t require removing the parking that is currently there. It would also be able to adapt in the future if at some point a future property owner decided to remove the front parking in favor of a plaza or redevelop the parking lot on the corner of Carroll & 7th, for example.
(That part of the property is another missed opportunity – the old Montgomery Ward auto service building that was originally there was an interesting old structure in its own right and could have been converted into a cool restaurant location. Given the huge amount of parking that was put in on that side of the Montgomery Ward building, it is likely the old service building could easily have been integrated into the development without impacting parking in any significant way.)
Tried to submit my comment last night via iPhone, but I guess it didn’t work- something to do with the hashcash I think…
Anyway…
No thanks to losing two lanes of traffic in exchange for on street parking (which will probably be usurped for “valet only” during any time you might actually want to use it- a la downtown). I traverse this area on a daily basis, and 7th is getting awfully close to gridlock already- especially when trains rumble thru. Good point on the Lancaster alternative, which is unfortunately limited in its usefulness due to the unnecessary No Left Turn at the top of the hill (Summit) when eastbound. This coupled with the lack of access to Forest Park Blvd from Lancaster hurts this alternative greatly.
Each of these new developments are a great move forward, each alone an accomplishment. I think when we compare the three we find items that have worked better at some than others. I’m sure no of us mean to reduce the benefit of any of these, only to point out the best practices of each.
Montgomery Plaza is such a leap forward from what existed previously. Part of the “place” feeling is lost in the landscape of a “made for the day after Thanksgiving” giant flat parking lot. This disconnects too much of the nearby (set back) retail from the front. Additionally, I think Kevin is spot-on, the center/plaza in no way incorporates the front street. There is a terrific park/hike & bike trail right across the street (Trinity Trail system), I’d like to see some effort to incorporate it into the Plaza. Some method of easy connection and use. Those living there, those shopping/dining there, and those wishing to commute there could all include the park/trails as something to enjoy as part of there time at the Plaza.
Thanks for the article Kevin and the web links to others of interest.
Jim
Jonathan – there is a bug between our iPhone mode and the hashcash system. I’ll have it fixed soon.
I don’t think anybody is suggesting any of the efforts to date in this area are “bad,” per se. The point is two-fold. Each of the projects individually must deal with 7th in its current iteration, which is not conducive to people, ie people outside of the car. Second, each of the developments individually needs an improved (and not the engineering definition of “improvement” as in traffic flow) 7th to begin to unite all of them together, into a more coherent district.
7th is and will be the tie that binds, but until it is designed as an attractor itself, its nature strictly as a conduit for continual traffic flow becomes a repellent, that each of the individual developments must deal with. And each did to varying degrees.
What happens when a street is hostile to pedestrians, is any development will pull its “people space” off that street, as each of the above did. The problem with this from an analytic perspective, is that every time you have to make a turn or redirection off of the primary stem, there is a reduction of energy. Energy is people. Energy is commerce.
The story that is typically most effective in conveying this, is when Pompidou converted all of Champs Elysees to traffic flow. It’s sole purpose as a link. Businesses died and the street became a repellent force. When it was converted back in the 90s to having a slip, slow movement lane with parking, and broad pedestrian space, only then did it become the attraction that it is today, with some of the most valuable real estate in the world. Now it has traffic flow, browsing lanes, parking, pedestrian space, bike lanes, and transit. It is designed as both link and “place.”
While 7th isn’t exactly Champs Elysees, it does have the potential as the single most important street in Fort Worth as the primary linkage b/w downtown and the Cultural District. It should be designed to reflect that importance and celebrate it. So, the starbucks manager should pay attention, because a more attractive 7th street will make for better business for all businesses on or near 7th. The eventual plan will need the local business support.
(and by attractive, I mean in the physical sense of attracting people to it, not some simple and ineffectual styling.)
ps. local business owners fought the conversion of Stroget in Copenhagen to carfree. 40 years hence it is now the hot city in the world. While noone is suggesting any carfree ideas (very few American cities have the density to support it), important seams should be designed to be inclusive, aka complete streets. 7th has the width for it.
By the way, everyone in Fort Worth should give their city’s own Scott Polikov a high-five for his tireless work getting TxDOT to adopt a context-sensitive design manual for streets.
Here’s my idea for fixing a part of the 7th to Target connection: make the stop signs/intersections into roundabouts. They’re already round, they just have stop signs and no middle barrier in them. Think about it. This is such an easy way to begin to train FW drivers about how to use a roundabout in a safe, slow speed environment which wouldn’t disrupt the flow of traffic and could also enhance the pedestrian element. I have walked and biked to Target. My walking experience suggests that the pedestrian-way (for lack of a better term) in the middle of the development could easily be enhanced with some landscaping. Tying it to the roundabout/car corridor improvements could do wonders. Yes, Target is a long way from the MW Plaza and yes, it sucks that they did it that way, but neither building is moving anytime soon, so let’s push for some things that would make it better. Personally, when I drive to Target, i treat those intersections as a roundabout, rarely stopping at the stop sign. I’m pretty sure FWPD has no jurisdiction in there, anyway.
One final note, as some others have pointed out – the place is a whole lot better than it was 5-6 years ago. It was also the city’s first ever municipal setting designation (MSD) which allowed use of the space despite contaminated groundwater. It’s a brownfield redevelopment, basically. Target took a risk, the city took a risk and my guess is that it has paid off for both. Could Target have used a better urban model? Sure. Did they have one? Don’t know.
Can anybody tell me who’s in charge of the “streets” in there? I’ll personally pitch the roundabout idea.
Doug!
Hey, nice perspective, and good to hear from you again.
BTW, your other recent comments to include “G….r Good Hair”, funny, but I doubt it’ll catch on, and I’m sure it will not make a campaign flier/poster/commercial
Jim
Doug,
I would guess that the master developer, Weber & Company, would still be in charge, although I suspect that Target’s lease (or sales contract) gives it a heavy amount of control over that space. I remember hearing that it was Target that insisted on a) the hole in the building and b) the demolition of the building at the corner of 7th and Carrol to achieve greater visibility of its building in the back from 7th Street. In my opinion, it would have been better had Target gone where Baker Brothers is now, pushing all the parking to the rear, and turing its main entrance toward a more complete street running down the middle of the site.
Kevin – good comments on the ideas for ways to enhance ped access to the front.