First National Bank/Baker/Bob R. Simpson Building Redevelopment
#51 ghughes
Posted 18 October 2004 - 08:10 PM
And great quote with attribution for John.
#52
Posted 18 October 2004 - 09:35 PM
#53
Posted 18 October 2004 - 10:09 PM
Wow, unexpected, but welcome! I wonder who it is that surfs the forum, perhaps it's Ms. Baker? Mr. Fuquay? I think it would be so cool if someone like that were to post on the forum...
Perhaps they already have. My very strong guess if someone like that were to post on the Forum, we would not even be aware of it.
#54
Posted 20 October 2004 - 05:52 AM
it would be interesting to see if there is a surge in hits to your web site over the next several days. more voices on the forum would be a welcome development.
Donnie, the number of hits for the site doubled on Monday and then slacked off somewhat on Tuesday. I don't know if we have attracted any new forum members from the article.
#55 gdvanc
Posted 20 October 2004 - 06:35 AM
Donnie, the number of hits for the site doubled on Monday and then slacked off somewhat on Tuesday. I don't know if we have attracted any new forum members from the article.
Excellent. I'm sure that will generate new interest and membership. I guess it's not surprising that it was a spike on Monday but less so on Tuesday. Most people would have read the article the first day and discarded the paper that day; they would be more likely to have visited the site if they did so on the day they read the article.
#56
Posted 20 November 2004 - 09:00 AM
#57
Posted 10 December 2004 - 08:07 PM
There is an outside "scaffold"elevator erected on the Houston street side of the bldg. now.. I can't wait to see something else going up on the site. Building-wise that is.
Bryan
P.S. To all the Paschal people, my Grandfather started the Pantherette. You can look in the book Amon by Jerry Flemmons in the index look for C. L. Richhart, the story if I remember right is in there.
#58
Posted 10 December 2004 - 11:59 PM
#59
Posted 11 December 2004 - 09:44 AM
#60
Posted 11 December 2004 - 08:51 PM
I also have noticed that they have finished repairing the basement of the building below the sidewalk. They completely rebuilt that part of the building.
#61
Posted 11 December 2004 - 11:06 PM
The old photograph shows fire escapes. Obviously at some point, some sort of fireproof interior fire stairs were added to the building. Off the top of my head, I can recall another building that used to have fire escapes but no longer does - the hotel that is now known as The Aristocrat in downtown Dallas but which used to be called The White Plaza and, before that, the Dallas Hilton (the first hotel Conrad Hilton built and the first he named after himself). I remember seeing the fire escapes on the hotel when I was a kid - and the place looks much better today without them.
Question: For an old building to be converted from one that had to have fire escapes to one that has an interior stair well that meets modern fire safety standards, what has to be done? Is it a particularly difficult and/or expensive thing to do? Is making such a conversion actually required by modern building codes when an old building is renovated or restored? Or is it legal to maintain adequate working fire escapes. I know that the W.T.Waggoner Building still has fire escapes - but it has been some years now since it was restored.
As someone who is not very comfortable being in situations involving open heights, I don't think I would enjoy taking a trip down from the top of the W.T.Waggoner Building!
#62
Posted 11 December 2004 - 11:43 PM
I think the new interior stair at the Baker Building was constructed in 1967 when the last quarter of the tower was built over the light well. After that was constructed, the fire escape was no longer needed.
#63
Posted 12 December 2004 - 01:27 PM
I can now see what you are speaking of. I can tell now about the cantilevered enterence space. Other than that vertical square column, will the enterence require a horizontal beam or two, to complete that part of the enterence?
Bryan
#64
Posted 17 December 2004 - 10:02 PM
#65
Posted 18 January 2005 - 12:37 PM
It does not look as if they are going to have the large windows on the south side of the building like in the picture. The infill with the CMU seems to preclude those. Also it looks like the window area is going to be a different configuration on the front of the building. I am looking at the building today (1-18)
Bryan
#66
Posted 18 January 2005 - 06:12 PM
XTO probably didn't need that much glass on the second floor so they decided to have some of that glass to be spandrel. The second thing to remember is that the installation of second floor across the entire bank lobby forced the windows to have their lower limits inside the mechanical mezzanine, when at one time, this was occupiable space. The change in the floor levels almost forces the use of spandrel in the lower section of the restored window openings. Otherwise, you would be looking into the mechanical space from the exterior.
#67
Posted 02 February 2005 - 09:53 PM
#68
Posted 20 February 2005 - 09:36 PM
#69
Posted 30 May 2005 - 08:42 PM
The next two were taken on May 30, 2005. The first was taken on the south side of the building:
This picture was taken on the west side of the building. This was the original entrance to the bank. As you can see, limestone fluted columns are starting to rise from the new stone base. Until the scaffolding is removed, it will be very difficult to see the final product.
#70
Posted 30 May 2005 - 10:49 PM
#71
Posted 31 May 2005 - 08:25 AM
#72
Posted 02 June 2005 - 02:09 PM
#73
Posted 16 June 2005 - 07:48 PM
I now have updated pictures of the Baker Building base construction. Although reported here first as a restoration, but never confirmed by XTO, it is readily apparent that this is more than just a remodeling.
Overall view of the new base. The scaffolding has been removed on the south side, but still remains on the west where all of the intricate stone work is being erected.
The less decorated south side of the building:
The very decorated west side and columns now rising to the cornice of the base:
Finally, a detail of the west facade:
#74
Posted 17 June 2005 - 09:19 AM
John, you would know better than I would about this, but from everything I read, this kind of project is exceedingly rare. And not just in FW, but all around the country. That is, going in where there is nothing or next to nothing left of the original and restoring it as faithfully as possible. I believe what's more common is a renovation that restores some historical details but is mostly modern.
Go XTO!
#75
Posted 17 June 2005 - 01:21 PM
#76
Posted 17 June 2005 - 04:06 PM
Jonny, the metal bar above the base is the steel structure that will be used to support a replicated cornice. When I was taking the pictures, the workers had just installed the first corner pieces. You can see that work in the first and third photographs.
#77
Posted 17 June 2005 - 07:10 PM
Wow, that project is really breathtaking, I think I am going downtown tonight to take a closer look, from the street without a camera I mean.
Pup
#78
Posted 17 June 2005 - 07:29 PM
#79
Posted 26 June 2005 - 07:49 AM
#80
Posted 26 June 2005 - 09:05 AM
#81
Posted 24 July 2005 - 08:05 AM
#82
Posted 25 July 2005 - 08:01 AM
It looks like the columns on the Burk Burnett building are each one massive piece of stone and are set out a little bit from the front wall of the building. The columns on the new facade on the Baker building are in sections and are just hung from the steel frame of the building. The Baker columns appear to have no structural capacity, not even to supoprt the rest of the stone facade. Is that also true of the columns on the Burk Burnett building?
On a side note, I can't recall seeing too many solid stone columns in any modern construction. What does it take to make a 30 ft. column out of one piece of stone? Is it just prohibitively expensive?
#83
Posted 04 August 2005 - 01:39 AM
#84
Posted 06 August 2005 - 06:37 AM
#85
Posted 01 October 2005 - 08:23 AM
A view of the southwest corner of the new base:
A straight on view of the Houston Street facade:
#86
Posted 01 October 2005 - 01:11 PM
#87
Posted 01 October 2005 - 01:14 PM
#88
Posted 02 October 2005 - 12:33 PM
#89
Posted 02 October 2005 - 01:03 PM
#90
Posted 03 October 2005 - 08:10 PM
#91
Posted 04 October 2005 - 12:52 AM
In a nutshell he was an egomaniacal Swiss furniture designer who refashioned himself an architect, city planner, futurist, and anti-urban philosopher. His furniture is great, some of his architecture is good, and the rest of his work is utter nonsense. He thought we should get rid of streets, replace them with elevated freeways and all live in shiny towers a la the Jetsons. Actually, the Jetsons is a pretty acurate picture of how he and his contemporaries thought. His ideas really caught on and after a few decades most people in architecture, developing, and construction were building in his style whether they heard of him or not. But his style was actually more of a philosophy: old is bad, new is good, nothing is worth preserving, everything should be torn down and be rebuilt in the International Style (boxes), and that is the only path to equality and modernity. Really.
There's a lot more to this story than my short glib response. More later when I'm not so tired. In the mean time. . . John?
BTW, he designed the UN headquarters in NY and the absurd city of Brasilia.
#92
Posted 05 October 2005 - 12:04 AM
That person was Le Corbusier
Yes. The drink of choice for a Ladies MAN.
Don't mind if I do.
www.iheartfw.com
#93
Posted 06 October 2005 - 06:59 PM
#94
Posted 07 October 2005 - 03:02 PM
well shame on him and his steel buildings and modern idealistic thinking....
Right on courtnie!!! Shame on steel buildings with their stupid efficient structural grids.
And while we’re at it, shame on you too concrete buildings. You can’t fool us. We know you’re only so strong because of all that STEEL REBAR you’re hiding in there.
Come to think of it, shame on brick veneer buildings too. That’s just how these steel and concrete buildings will try to pass themselves off as decent godfearing buildings. DON’T FALL FOR IT!!!
Actually, shame on structural brick buildings too. We all know those bricks were produced in some factory somewhere with MODERN STEEL machinery. Don’t think we’re not onto you too.
And I guess shame on all buildings made with dimensional lumber for the same reason.
And I guess any quarried stone.
And last but not least, FOR SHAME, modern idealism!!! We were all perfectly happy stacking up whatever sticks and rocks we found lying around before YOU came along!!!
#95
Posted 07 October 2005 - 03:21 PM
um... forget that previous post.
#96
Posted 07 October 2005 - 05:55 PM
Also I'm a big fan of his steel furniture. Mies van der Rohe, too. Just not their ethos.
#97
Posted 10 October 2005 - 09:11 PM
I’ve read all those books. I would rate them anywhere from “arrogant and mean-spirited with dubious reasoning, but funny,” (Kunstler) to “astute” (Jacobs).
Le Corbusier was a great architect/ furniture designer, decent painter, and pretty awful planner, but if you see his plan for Paris as anything other than a publicity stunt, you might be reading a little too much into it. And to describe his buildings as ‘international style boxes’ excludes a pretty significant portion of his work (Notre Dame-du-Haut, for example). And anyway, isn’t ‘boxiness’ an important component of New Urbanism?
In my opinion, Le Corbusier’s work did far more to promote urbanism around the globe than another gated uber-suburb from DP-Z could ever hope to do.
#98
Posted 15 October 2005 - 08:04 AM
They are starting to put the finishing touches on the base, now. Light fixtures are going on the columns along 7th Street. It won't be long before the exterior of the building will be completed. This week, XTO went before the Downtown Design Review Board asking to be able to install a bronze plaque adjacent to the entrance and an awning over the elevator lobby exit in the alley.
#99
Posted 18 October 2005 - 08:15 PM
Here is a link to the bank photograph from the Jack White Collection, University of Texas at Arlington:
http://www.fortworth...nbbankbldgs.jpg
#100
Posted 30 October 2005 - 08:16 AM
Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Downtown
Downtown
Architecture →
Historic Buildings and Preservation →
Interior Photos of the Tarrant County CourthouseStarted by John T Roberts, 15 Jan 2024 Downtown |
|
|||
Projects and New Construction →
Ideas and Suggestions for Projects →
Filling Empty Spaces in DowntownStarted by Jeriat, 26 Jun 2023 Sundance Square, Downtown and 8 more... |
|
|||
Downtown
Projects and New Construction →
Residential →
Oil and Gas BuildingStarted by eastfwther, 05 Jan 2023 Downtown, 309 W. 7th |
|
|||
Downtown
Architecture →
Local History →
Implosion of the Worth Hotel - Oct. 29, 1972Started by John T Roberts, 29 Nov 2022 Downtown |
|
|||
Downtown
Planning →
City Issues →
New QT's traffic problem?Started by johnfwd, 22 Sep 2022 Downtown |
|
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users