Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Trinity River Park

User avatar
casperitl
Posts: 15
Joined: 13 Dec 2016 15:41

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby casperitl » 18 Jun 2018 22:39

Odd that people like the Mayor keep using the term "game changer". None of these projects are "game changer" league.

The Standing Wave is in violation of the River and Harbors Act, Clean Water Act. It was built illegally. The Standing Wave was an interesting place to visit but was horribly built and a real roadblock to navigation of the river.

The Corps of Engineers authored a Record of Decision regarding the Balanced Vision Plan. This was produced before any kind of grand new park was planned. The new park and all the renderings of meanders, concrete, trees must somehow fit into that Balanced Vision Plan or it will all need to go back to the Corps of Engineers for another decision. MVVA out of New York City is supposed to figure out if that can be accomplished.

Really, if you are reading this, you have no say in the matter. The Dallas City Council gave away 10,000 acres of public property to a Local Government Corporation which then hired the Trinity Park Conservancy as a contractor to build the park. The public is out of the scene now. The decision making process came full circle with some of the same bad decision makers now in charge of the newly promised projects.

City staff and city council failed as shepherds of these projects. I hold those members of city government personally accountable for ruining and squandering the opportunities that should have come to fruition. They had the budget, money and votes to build something special. They ruined it. It will take two generations from now for this to get fixed.

I think it's $150-250 million that needs to be raised very quickly now. Time is running out on the original timeline.

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 1031
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 19 Jun 2018 08:30

Thanks for the more detailed update the reality is there are no current blueprints for the park we just have concept renderings and no money to build whatever is proposed in the final blueprints. If you guys can find 150-250 million in Dallas 1% pockets waiting to be squandered on a project that has proven it won't happen then be my guest. I gave my last vote of support to this project year ago. I will no longer support any money spent on the Trinity River boondoggle and if given the chance will actively vote down money spent if that chance is ever given to me again.

User avatar
casperitl
Posts: 15
Joined: 13 Dec 2016 15:41

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby casperitl » 19 Jun 2018 10:37

There are plans for the park but you won't have input on them. It is not your park. It is a private park that the public can access some of the time.

Ideally, the $150-250 million would be paid by the real estate developers who hold the real estate straddling the County Jail. Without a grand park plan, they will not have a park.

The 1998 Trinity River Project will likely be viewed decades from now as a bust. Nearly all the money has been spent and there is very little to show for it. Some will point to the Trinity River Audubon Center as a bright light. It loses hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in addition to poor attendance. More of a private wedding venue and golf tournament rental space than educational center now. The Horse Park never got off the ground. There is a new private horse facility 5 minutes away south of I-20 that does it better.

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 1031
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 19 Jun 2018 12:50

^And a not so successful private golf course wearing a public golf course sheepskin.

DPatel304
Posts: 864
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby DPatel304 » 19 Jun 2018 17:23

This thread and the Fair Park thread both make me sad when I think about what they both 'could be'.

DPatel304
Posts: 864
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby DPatel304 » 20 Jul 2018 11:25

The 200-Acre Harold Simmons Park Between The Trinity River Levees Moves Forward
https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... d/?ref=mpw

As I suspected, nothing really new is being said in this article. They mentioned the need for $200 million a few times in the article. It really seems, to me, like they are really just waiting for private entities to step up and fund this thing, and all these articles are just a way to ask for the money.

User avatar
exelone31
Posts: 243
Joined: 31 Oct 2016 11:35

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby exelone31 » 20 Jul 2018 11:50

DPatel304 wrote:The 200-Acre Harold Simmons Park Between The Trinity River Levees Moves Forward
https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... d/?ref=mpw

As I suspected, nothing really new is being said in this article. They mentioned the need for $200 million a few times in the article. It really seems, to me, like they are really just waiting for private entities to step up and fund this thing, and all these articles are just a way to ask for the money.


Yeah, that headline is very clickbait-y. They say move forward in the headline, but then repeatedly state in the article that there's not enough money and no design in place for the park. Momentum seems slim at this point.

User avatar
tamtagon
Site Admin
Posts: 1158
Joined: 16 Oct 2016 12:04

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby tamtagon » 20 Jul 2018 12:09

Harold Simmons Park, named for the billionaire nuclear waste disposal magnate, was born from a $50 million gift from his widow, Annette Simmons. The Conservancy got $10 million up front, but the other $40 million is locked up pending naming rights, establishment of a governance structure to build and maintain the park, and raising enough money to the tune of the Simmons’ family’s “reasonable satisfaction” by next September.


Forbes said Harold Simmons (rest in peace) was worth $10 billion when he died. How about upping the gift. Sometimes the family fortunes are owed back to the society from which they were taken.

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 1031
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 20 Jul 2018 12:27

So the new Trinity Park concept is only between the Continental Bridge Park and 35 according to the article correct? Well that's a sizable drop from previously planned improvements all along the flood zone.

User avatar
exelone31
Posts: 243
Joined: 31 Oct 2016 11:35

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby exelone31 » 20 Jul 2018 12:31

cowboyeagle05 wrote:So the new Trinity Park concept is only between the Continental Bridge Park and 35 according to the article correct? Well that's a sizable drop from previously planned improvements all along the flood zone.


I believe that's just the area that the Simmons' gift applies to. Ultimately the idea is to "enhance" everything, whatever form that ends up taking.

DPatel304
Posts: 864
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby DPatel304 » 20 Jul 2018 12:31

cowboyeagle05 wrote:So the new Trinity Park concept is only between the Continental Bridge Park and 35 according to the article correct? Well that's a sizable drop from previously planned improvements all along the flood zone.


I thought this had been the plan for a while.

I'm all for scaling this project down though. Just start small and let it grow over time.

lakewoodhobo
Posts: 489
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:49
Location: Elmwood, Oak Cliff

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby lakewoodhobo » 20 Jul 2018 13:30

I know the Van Valkenburgh plan is still in the design stages, but I can't look at that rendering without wondering if it's physically possible without lots and lots of retaining walls to hold up those winding trails.

I have a feeling that once those more realistic renderings are released, it'll remind potential donors of the ugly retaining walls on the white water feature (and the absolutely abhorrent waste of money that was).

I hope I'm wrong.

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 1031
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45

Re: Trinity River Park

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 20 Jul 2018 15:29

I don't think the Corp would allow retaining walls like you speak of. Let me put it this way the Corp has objected to trees, shrubs and natural plantings for decades now. They require that everything down there has to be mowed down regularly like it's a suburban lawn which, to be honest, is why it looks so dumpy in most of the time. I don't foresee much of anything beyond maybe a realignment of the river itself as more wavy and some better trail way routes that connect things better. The reason the flood zone is the way it is is that the Army Corp of Engineers has determined its function as a large area for excess water during rainstorms supersedes all other needs and desires. I am no longer convinced the Trinity Conservancy can get the Corp to agree to anything beyond some minor million dollars of lipstick on this pig.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Login