Sorry for the short notice, but I will be making the presentation for Historic Fort Worth's 2015 Most Endangered List at noon today. The location will again be at Thistle Hill and the food trucks will be open. Remember, a small part of the overall cost of your food purchased at Thistle Hill goes to benefit Historic Fort Worth.
HFW 2015 Most Endangered List
Posted 06 May 2015 - 03:05 PM
I know the event is during a workday, but I was sad that the turnout at the actual event was as low as it was last year (probably about 10-15 attendees). I didn't recognize anyone from the city council, which was kind of sad...I think I saw Zedah there last year but not this year.
Posted 08 May 2015 - 11:05 AM
For those of you who didn't get the list, below is a link to the Fort Worth Business Press article on the 2015 list.
Today, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram came out with an editorial on the list. The link to that editorial is below:
The Star-Telegram is saying that HFW is getting too political with the list. The Stockyards and the Cultural District have been on the list before and I don't remember the paper stating that the organization was too political when the areas were placed on that list previously. The Stockyards is a National Register Historic District and the organization is perfectly within their rights to name it as endangered when new development is coming. Although the Cultural District is different, the process that is set up now could endanger some of our historic museums and public buildings in that area, as well.
Posted 08 May 2015 - 12:14 PM
I get including the Cultural District for the lack of a cohesive master plan for the area, but mentioning the paid parking just sounds like whining to me and lends a lack of credibility to the list. Other than an article in the Weekly decrying the downfall of the cattle barn flea markets (which had problems beyond the start of paid parking), I've yet to hear anything but anecdotal evidence of cultural district institutions that are truly suffering as a result of the paid parking. Free parking at entertainment venues is the exception, not the norm these days. Are the parking fees, the collection system, and the way it all came about perfect? Absolutely not, but it's not a nail in the coffin for the CD. John, I respect everything you and HFW do, but I'm disappointed that the list went in that direction, especially in a city like FW that has far bigger preservation issues than that.
Posted 08 May 2015 - 05:44 PM
Too political? Really? One statement got my attention: "By including the Stockyards, Historic Fort Worth gets into the middle of a dispute between some property owners who want to limit changes in the area and those who support a major new development there." Is this a way of saying when development is on the table, no places are important enough for broad protection that may somehow limit or delay new development? After all, Fort Worth has such a sterling preservation record so I'm sure any developers will recognize the historic and cultural significance of the Stockyards and will strive to preserve those assets in their re-development plans. Editorial opinions are just that so those who support the cause of historic preservation are free to view things differently. I personally think development can be a force for good and when preservation is part of the plan, (as in the successful Hillside residential development) everyone wins. Political or not, Historic Fort Worth is the voice of preservation in our city and I believe it has done a remarkable job with very limited resources. I dread the day when there are not enough historic sites remaining to make a list but I consider that a real possibility in the years ahead. Even "progressive" Dallas has arguably done a better job at preserving their built heritage and historic sites than we have. It makes me wonder from the editorial if the newspaper itself is too politically biased in favor of developers than the broad citizenry of our city? Why can't we have new development which includes historic preservation? The two should not be considered mutually exclusive in an enlightened major American city like ours.
Read more here: http://www.star-tele...l#storylink=cpy
Posted 09 May 2015 - 03:04 PM
JBB, Historic Fort Worth gives the public an opportunity to submit nominees for the Most Endangered and for Historic Preservation Awards. The organization's Public Affairs Committee reviews these nominations from the public and its members. The committee can also submit nominees. The final list is approved by the Board of Directors.
I will agree that we may have more preservation issues, but this is what was submitted to the Board and approved. I honestly think they are valid. I've mentioned my position on the Stockyards, since coming development may have a positive, or negative, effect on the existing building stock. I still have a concern over Will Rogers. The buildings are some of our most cherished landmarks, yet they have no local historic designation. This means they have no protection against demolition. The City Staff at the facility say that they are not going to allow anything to happen to the buildings. I'm actually not worried about this administration. What I am worried about is our City Council and staff 50 years from now. They might want to tear down the Will Rogers Memorial Center.
Posted 09 May 2015 - 04:43 PM
I know we've beaten this dead horse sufficiently, but what is keeping the city from designating a "cherished" facility that they own? I just don't understand that.
Posted 09 May 2015 - 06:23 PM
Absolutely nothing is keeping the City from designating its own property. It's my impression that the staff at Will Rogers feels that a local historic designation will hamper them in making repairs. Sometimes, on facility that old, they need to make repairs very quickly to allow a show or an event to open on schedule. The Preservation Ordinance states that repair in like kind does not have to be reviewed by the Landmarks Commission.
In my dealings with City Staff in all departments, I have found them very reluctant to want to designate any structure owned by the city. The City's Preservation Plan calls for the designation of its public buildings.
Posted 18 December 2015 - 05:08 PM
That's encouraging news. So often we read about another piece of our architectural legacy being lost so learning about something being saved is a pleasant surprise. I added on the Gem on Samuels Avenue-Garvey House thread about 3 more old houses along Samuels Avenue being lost to demolition in the past few days. I continue to worry the Garvey House itself could be lost but have no realistic strategy to offer for saving it. I had believed once the two brothers who owned it got it sold, as they did last year, (Sept. 2015) a new owner would be able to bring it back to being the pride of the neighborhood again. Not so, it appears.
Posted 04 May 2016 - 10:42 AM
I'm not a great proponent of historic preservation in all cases but I make a particular exception to the Masonic Lodge, a unique structure in Fort Worth. It's on the 2016 "most endangered" list (see Fort Worth Business magazine article below.) I've never been inside this building but I pass it every day in my work commute downtown.
Posted 04 May 2016 - 11:26 AM
Are there just the three properties on the list for 2016? I suppose the current items are meant to be viewed as part of an ongoing list updated and added to each year. I wonder if it is possible to dismantle the soon-to-be-doomed railroad bridge, restore any weak points, and reassemble it on new foundations somewhere along the Trinity River for a bike trail. There seems to be a need for a river crossing downstream from Beach Street and before the Loop 820/Wright Freeway bridge, maybe as part of the Gateway Park complex. If there WAS proper protection for structures like the chapel, Cook's Hospital might see appropriate to re-purpose it as a ... Chapel! Every hospital has one (correct me if there is a hospital supported by an atheist charitable organization). I was not aware that there were any preservation issues with the Masonic Temple. I understand the general lack of preservation ordinances and other protections for any building in Fort Worth, but doesn't the Masonic organization take pretty good care of the temple; is there any plausible reason to anticipate it's demise in the near to intermediate future?
- JBB likes this
Posted 04 May 2016 - 12:19 PM
Sounds like the biggest threat to the Temple is the lack of funds for maintenance and modernization.
I love the idea of moving and restoring the railroad bridges as pedestrian/bike crossings.
Posted 17 May 2016 - 06:41 AM
Posted 11 May 2017 - 10:32 AM
Historic Fort Worth 2017:
Very interesting and far reaching with the inclusion of a tree; mid-century houses; East 4th Street building, a structure that has inexplicably caught my eyes in passing for its style. The CC Arena is a surprise.
Great job, HFW!
- Austin55 likes this
Posted 11 May 2017 - 10:48 AM
I agree that they did a great job with the list this year.
I'm also surprised about the inclusion of the arena, but it is indeed a hugely iconic structure. I get that it's obsolete as far as arenas go and there's no sense in the city maintaining 2 arenas. It would be fantastic if some of sort of creative plan came about to reuse and adapt it for meeting and exhibit space.
- PeopleAreStrange likes this
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users