HFW's Most Endangered Lists
#1
Posted 08 May 2008 - 04:57 PM
Below are the structures and buildings that made the 2008 List:
NEW TO THE LIST THIS YEAR:
Inspiration Point in Marion Sansom Park - 2501 Roberts Cut-Off Road
Heritage Park - Downtown bluff
Will Rogers complex - 3301 W. Lancaster Ave.
Farrington Field - 1501 N. University Drive
Fort Worth Public Market Building - 1400 Henderson St.
Forest Park Gates - 2300 block of Park Place Avenue at Forest Park Boulevard
Neighborhoods over 50 years old.
RETURNING TO THE LIST FROM LAST YEAR:
Fort Worth Power and Light Co./TXU Electric Power Plant, 100 to 300 blocks North Main Street
Texas & Pacific Warehouse, 300 block of West Lancaster Avenue
White (Berry) Theater, 3033 Hemphill St.
Ridglea Theater, 6025 Camp Bowie Blvd.
Azle Theater, 2206 Azle Ave.
Below is a link to Sandra Baker's Fort Worth Star-Telegram article:
http://www.star-tele...ory/630053.html
#2
Posted 09 May 2008 - 10:14 AM
#3
Posted 19 May 2008 - 08:12 AM
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#4
Posted 19 May 2008 - 05:26 PM
#5
Posted 19 May 2008 - 05:50 PM
There is not enough room to build anything else around those sidewalks.
#6
Posted 19 May 2008 - 10:11 PM
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#7
Posted 20 May 2008 - 11:06 AM
It's hard to build a palace these days:
Why don't architects today design buildings like the magnificent old edifices in Europe? -Gisela Dawson La Habra Heights,Calif.
In days past, rulers could tax thier subjects and then decree the constuction of most anything they pleased.These days,the cost of building is borne by government,business, institutions,ect. Even the biggest companies can't afford to erect offices that resemble the Louvre. Imagine how stockholders would react to a design for a company headquarters with gargoyles and flying buttresses.
And this would pale compared to the outcry if the federal government wanted to demolish the White House and build even a pint-sized Versailles to house the President.
#8
Posted 23 May 2008 - 05:34 AM
John,
whats the thought process behind inspriation point, Last time I was out there it wasnt too bad but I havent been out there in a while. You would think they would want to restore it and not just demolish something else. Im quite surprised to see Farrington Field on there as well as the Will Rogers complex. Do you suppose there is a "bigger plan" behind the scenes for these areas since the Down Town and surrounding areas are growing and changing at the speed of light.
#9
Posted 23 May 2008 - 06:36 AM
--
Kara B.
#10
Posted 23 May 2008 - 08:47 AM
In days past, rulers could tax thier subjects and then decree the constuction of most anything they pleased.These days,the cost of building is borne by government,business, institutions,ect. Even the biggest companies can't afford to erect offices that resemble the Louvre. Imagine how stockholders would react to a design for a company headquarters with gargoyles and flying buttresses.
I don't know that I fully agree with the answer given in Parade though it is certainly true that rulers would tax citizens to build monuments to themselves and their regimes and some even used slave labor, as was the case with the very beautiful city of St. Petersburg, Russia.
On the other hand, all one has to do is stroll the streets of New York City and one will see literally hundreds of pre-World War II buildings that rivaled and even exceeded the magnificence of the old edifices in Europe - and all but a very small handful were built entirely with private capital. Indeed, the Woolworth Building - which at age 95 is still the city's 15th tallest - was paid for in cash.
Then again, when F.W.Woolworth commissioned the building, there were no income taxes at all in the United States so it was much, much easier for someone such as Woolworth to be able to accumulate the kind of capital necessary to pay for a skyscraper with cash. The income tax hits hardest those who aspire to become wealthy because of the profoundly negative impact it has on capital accumulation. Those who are already wealthy are not as badly impacted as it does not tax wealth that is already accumulated but rather as it is earned and accumulated. So in our case, it is almost a reverse of how things were in Europe in the past - instead of our rulers imposing heavy taxation in order to build magnificent monuments, they impose heavy taxation that drains away capital which otherwise might have been spent on magnificent skyscrapers and a whole bunch of other arguably more important things such as research and equipment.
I think the biggest factor, however, in the decline of the magnificence of our buildings is the result of a massive decline in the general public's aesthetic expectations. Keep in mind that the wonderful pre World War II skyscrapers of New York were all commercial structures which necessarily meant that they had to have an appeal far beyond the approval of a narrow elite. And those aesthetic expectations were not just limited to architecture - they were also evident in many other areas such as music, clothing, industrial design, etc. Indeed, in the early 20th century, one would see men wearing sports coats and ties to sporting events such as baseball games. I am not suggesting that we necessarily go back to that - and certainly part of the difference on this is a result of changing standards of formality independent of changes in aesthetics. But it does illustrate that how things look was much more important to people back then and the standards by which such things were judged by ordinary everyday people back then would almost be considered as elitist in today's world. My favorite 78 rpm records to collect tend to be labels that sold for very low prices at places such as dime stores and, in the case with the old Depression era cardboard records, at newsstands. Such records were made to appeal to the widest possible mass audience - and listening to them I am constantly amazed at the high level of taste and musical sophistication that existed at the time among the same demographics that today are the hard core Wal-mart and dollar store shoppers.
Indeed, look at the old Kress stores from the pre World War II era - the company had its own in-house architects and they built beautiful store buildings. Kress was a dime store - a forerunner to today's Wal-marts, Targets and Kmarts. They built beautiful buildings because their customers valued them - and, therefore, it helped them competitively. Look at the big box stores built in the 1970s. Very obviously their customers did not really care much what the stores looked like. And if one's customers don't care what the store looks like - well why spend money on that which could be put to use elsewhere?
I do think the expectations of the general public - at least in the realm of architecture - have been improving in recent years. Observe that the exteriors of today's big box stores tend to be much more attractive than they were in the past - though they are rarely up to the standards of the old Kress stores. The reason they have become more attractive is because the stores think it might help draw in more customers.
Ultimately, dominant and prevailing trends in architecture - especially when the buildings are commercial in nature - are a reflection of the overall aesthetic taste and standards of the general public and of the wider culture which influences those tastes and standards.
#11
Posted 23 May 2008 - 09:38 AM
http://www.flickr.co...arch/218160936/
These old stores built up, big box stores today build out.
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#12
Posted 23 May 2008 - 10:01 AM
Indeed. Kress, it must be remembered, was not a store for the wealthy - they were a five & dime for regular working Joes and the middle class. Yet Mr. Kress cared about his buildings and wanted them to be beautiful. Structures like this made even buying simple household goods feel more important in a way.
Virtually every Kress store was absolutely gorgeous - here are a few. And remember, this was *common*:
Ours, of course:
Bakersfield, California:
Wichita, Kansas:
Asheville, North Carolina:
Del Rio, Texas:
Charlestown, South Carolina:
Lubbock, Texas:
New Orleans, Louisiana:
Memphis, Tennessee:
Savannah, Georgia:
Greensboro, North Carolina:
Durham, North Carolina:
East Orange, New Jersey:
Modesto, California:
San Antonio, Texas:
El Paso, Texas:
--
Kara B.
#13
Posted 23 May 2008 - 11:15 AM
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#14
Posted 23 May 2008 - 10:20 PM
#15
Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:12 AM
Our vote for "what can we do, count me in " is Heritage Park.
I thought there was a city election about ten years ago where voters OK'd a bunch of money to keep up the Will Rogers complex . Seems like soon after that vote, and despite that vote, the Basstapo built their silly-looking building Downtown to get all the biz from city ballet and opera that used to be presented at the jewel-box scale Will Rogers Auditorium.
#16
Posted 24 May 2008 - 07:42 AM
(Incidentally, Bass Hall, which you call "silly looking," I call "bite-the-back-of-your-hand gorgeous," but different strokes and all that, I suppose.)
--
Kara B.
#17
Posted 24 May 2008 - 10:35 PM
John,
whats the thought process behind inspriation point, Last time I was out there it wasnt too bad but I havent been out there in a while. You would think they would want to restore it and not just demolish something else. Im quite surprised to see Farrington Field on there as well as the Will Rogers complex. Do you suppose there is a "bigger plan" behind the scenes for these areas since the Down Town and surrounding areas are growing and changing at the speed of light.
Crestwood tried but we didnt have enough people in the neigborhood that wanted to really try and get it done. So needless to say our neigborhood is being torn down.
#18
Posted 25 May 2008 - 03:50 AM
I suppose I most object to the honking giant Angels. I'll try to envision the building less those objections next time I see it and maybe I'll see it anew.
And I pretty sure I'm in a minority-- I work in Dallas and many folk I work with say it's a great site and sight to see when they visit FW.
The signage that calls the doors "portals" is a bit of an irritant too. They are doors. Entrance would be OK too. But portals? What tha heck do the exit signs say--"egress?"
Thanks much on the update of the how and whys of what's going on at Will Rogers.
#19
Posted 25 May 2008 - 08:38 AM
There was actually a very controversial bond election in the early 1990s which proposed to do just that and more: the proposal was to demolish all of the Will Rogers Auditorium except for the front facade and rebuild a new theatre in its place. At the time the auditorium was in pretty bad shape with plaster falling from the ceiling. There was a country act by a fellow named Johnnie High that used the facility on a regular basis and which drew lots of people. Johnnie High fans were not too fond of the proposal and neither were people who valued the building as a historical landmark and those who did not wish to fund such a project with tax dollars.
The proposal failed miserably in the bond election - and I remember afterwards reading comments by various civic booster types about what a bunch of backward hicks they thought the voters of Fort Worth were for having the nerve to reject their enlightened vision. I seem to recall - and on this I might perhaps be mistaken - that the Bass family were very strong supporters of the proposal. Regardless, I have heard that the failure of the proposal is what spurred the Basses into action to get things started with Bass Hall. If so, I would say that was a VERY good thing both for downtown and the fact that we got a facility built with private funds as opposed to tax dollars as would have been the case with the Will Rogers proposal.
Not long after the bond election failed, the city closed Will Rogers Auditorium down claiming that it was unsafe. At the time there was a certain amount of controversy with Johnnie High fans claiming that the city's real motive for the closing was in retaliation for their role in defeating the proposal. There was also controversy in that money for repairs to the existing facility had already been approved but had not been spent. Eventually the city made the repairs and the theatre was opened back up again.
I also disagree with the notion that the facade on the building is the only thing that is worth saving. Even the sides of the building are quite nice and art deco. I am all for upgrading the facility - but I am very suspicious of any proposal that requires the building to be gutted.
#20
Posted 25 May 2008 - 10:26 AM
I went to a local production of the Nutcracker there this past winter, it was with a local ballet company of children and adult volunteers. The hall looked marvelous and had that old filmhouse feel to it. I can see how BIG productions would not do well there currently, but then again it seems as though the BASS HALL does not ALWAYS have SOLD OUT shows either. Based on my years of observations.
But private money used is good in my book.
www.iheartfw.com
#21
Posted 25 May 2008 - 11:24 AM
I did a google search after my last posting. After WR was closed down, he temporarily moved his show to a high school auditorium in Haltom City and ended up purchasing a 1,200 seat movie theatre in Arlington where he still puts on his show every Saturday evening. The show is also broadcast to a national audience via cable television.
When his show was at Will Rogers, it always attracted a large audience - it was a pain to have to drive through the Cultural District at the wrong time because of all the traffic. So that is basically several hundred people each and every week who are now going to Arlington for entertainment rather than here in Fort Worth. Of course, there are some who, no doubt, couldn't care less because they look down upon the particular demographic that attends such programs and it doesn't fit in with the "image" they wish to project for the city or the Cultural District. Personally, I think it is a great fit - right next door to a coliseum where rodeos are held and in a complex that is home to a livestock show. And ever since I first heard about his performances back in the early 1990s, I have had a certain admiration for what he is doing and has accomplished. I am not at all fond of modern country music so my guess is his show would not really be my cup of tea. Nevertheless, he is providing upbeat entertainment and bringing enjoyment to a great many enthusiastic fans. And he is doing so by means of live performances to large audiences on a weekly basis. And he obviously makes some sort of profit from doing so as he has endured for a long time and is not the recipient of corporate grants or government subsidies. Having a successful and long running live performance to an audience of that size outside of tourist spots such as New York or Vegas is an rare and enormous achievement in this day and age. I have always thought Fort Worth lost out on something good when he left.
And that is another reason why I think any proposal to destroy the current theatre is a mistake. There are lots of small ballet companies and other groups that need affordable places to put on recitals and other performances. And the availability of affordable theatre rentals is one factor that might make it possible for emerging performing arts groups to exist in the area. If you look at what demolishing and rebuilding that theatre would cost - well, I'll bet that sort of money could very easily fund a few start up theatre/music and or dance groups for a few years. Personally, I would rather see a few more performing arts groups in the area than a new threatre. I am not saying that taxpayer money should be spent on such groups - but that does put the cost into perspective. And furthermore, there is a need for a theatre to serve that particular niche. Why not Will Rogers? My strong guess is that the answer ultimately ends up being a matter of "prestige." I am not sure how booked up the theatre is - but I have no doubt that there are certain types out there who would rather see the place sit dark most of the year and host a handful of "prestigious" shows verses it being in use each and every week hosting performances by small time acts and by the Dolly Dingles Dance Academies of the world.
#22
Posted 25 May 2008 - 11:42 AM
--
Kara B.
#23
Posted 25 May 2008 - 04:07 PM
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#24
Posted 26 May 2008 - 12:00 AM
I hope those two Forest Park Gate towers get the restoration funding it needs. Just a picture perfect entry scene to the FW Zoo and Berkeley Place neighborhood area.
With the exception of that gas rig in the distance .
www.iheartfw.com
#25
Posted 26 May 2008 - 05:51 AM
Things are looking up for the Fort Worth Public Market
To be restored. Likely as office space. Interesting story with history.
#26
Posted 26 May 2008 - 08:46 AM
http://www.star-tele...ory/663673.html
That building is such a landmark. I hope it does well as office spaces...maybe even some artist's studios could go in there. Who knows?
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#27
Posted 26 May 2008 - 10:52 AM
http://www.star-tele...ory/663673.html
That building is such a landmark. I hope it does well as office spaces...maybe even some artist's studios could go in there. Who knows?
That is wonderful news about the Public Market - that building is a real gem.
Fort Worth's Public Market building, by the way, has sister buildings built by the same person and for the same purpose in Tulsa and in Oklahoma City.
I posted several photos of the Tulsa Public Market in this thread back in 2004. It, too, is a very beautiful building in a city filled with a wealth of incredible architecture from the period. (In the caption of one of the photos, I take a very pointed shot at a Star-Telegram columnist for some comments he made at the time when the heated controversy over cutting the hole in the facade of the Montgomery Ward Building - which I considered to be aesthetic vandalism and the columnist supported - was ranging on. Enough time has gone by that people might wonder what on earth that comment was about. I actually do have respect for the columnist in other matters based on my limited familiarity with his columns).
Unfortunately, only the facade of the Tulsa Public Market survives - and even that was about to be demolished and replaced with a Home Depot before a public outcry resulted in Home Depot deciding to at least preserve the facade, which is certainly better than nothing and was the most significant aspect of the building.
The Public Market in Oklahoma City built in 1928 is the oldest and largest of the three. It even has an auditorium inside. It also continues to function as a public market. I have yet to visit it - but it has a website here.
#28
Posted 26 May 2008 - 01:31 PM
Amon Carter Stadium says hi.
#29
Posted 26 May 2008 - 04:36 PM
#30
Posted 26 May 2008 - 04:48 PM
Also, the City of Fort Worth published a Citywide Preservation Plan in 2003, and one of the key components of the plan was for the city's public entities to get historic designations for their properties. This is also one of the reasons Will Rogers made the list. It is an iconic city landmark, yet it has no historic designation; thus, no protection against demolition.
#31
Posted 26 May 2008 - 10:40 PM
#32
Posted 27 May 2008 - 12:58 AM
Had a complex that cool and that historic been located here in Fort Worth/Dallas and survived into the 2000s, I have no doubt that it would be converted into either a luxury hotel or luxury residences. The complex was still in very decent condition when it was destroyed and continued in use as a location for movie shoots until the end.
When I saw the photos of the demolition - well, it made me feel sick.
If it can happen there with a building FAR more significant and historic than anything FWISD has or is likely to get its hands on - well, it can happen here as well.
Dallas had an old stadium of similar vintage and style at the intersection of I-35 and Oak Lawn. It was torn down sometime in the 1980s. I THINK the Infomart is on the site today.
And we DO have some very neat, historic school buildings - every so often I stumble across a new one when I am in a part of down I am not very familiar with. One of my favorites is North Hi Mount. That is a VERY beautiful building and it would be horrible if anything ever happened to it.
#33
Posted 27 May 2008 - 08:46 AM
I agree with this.
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#34
Posted 27 May 2008 - 04:21 PM
The School Survey was released in 2003 and then a Schools Subcommittee of the Designation Committee under the City's Historic & Cultural Landmarks Commission was formed. Several FWISD trustees served on this committee. A list of schools recommended to be designated was presented to the Designation Committee, but these designations were put on the back burner when the new superintendent was hired.
I don't know of any schools that have been designated as a result of the survey; however, at least three have been designated by being within the boundaries of two new local historic districts, both initiated by the City of Fort Worth. Those schools are Morningside Elementary, Morningside Middle (Morningside Historic District), and Maudrie L. Walton Elementary (Carver Heights Historic District).
I hope this information will assist you in forming your conclusions.
#35
Posted 27 May 2008 - 04:40 PM
I just wish we could get rid of those ugly chopped-off windows on most of the historic school buildings. Makes the buildings look a little dead, especially compared to the rest of the window frames.
--
Kara B.
#36
Posted 27 May 2008 - 10:20 PM
Seems like the public should have a say. I would find it very discouraging if Alamo Stadium near downtown SA were to one day be flattened for the sake of expensive and unnecessary RE development.
www.iheartfw.com
#37
Posted 28 May 2008 - 07:40 PM
Hi John,
Drove by Inspiration Point the other day on my way to breakfast and looks like its gone... so sad....
#38
Posted 28 May 2008 - 08:12 PM
Courtnie, you mean to say the columns, chimney, low walls, and the concrete slab have all been removed? Historic Fort Worth knew the shelter was in ruins since the roof burned off in the 1970's, but there was enough there for restoration. Please let me know what is still remaining or what was demolished.
#39
Posted 28 May 2008 - 08:53 PM
For several years, I've fostered a vision of a 100th anniversary party for Lake Worth in 2014, topped off by a symphony performance at Inspiration Point and a fireworks show launched from the dam. It sure would be nice if the Inspiration Point shelter could be there for it.
#40
Posted 28 May 2008 - 09:09 PM
For several years, I've fostered a vision of a 100th anniversary party for Lake Worth in 2014, topped off by a symphony performance at Inspiration Point and a fireworks show launched from the dam. It sure would be nice if the Inspiration Point shelter could be there for it.
That would be VERY neat. It would also be neat if someone would rebuild the Casino Ballroom.
#41
Posted 29 May 2008 - 12:38 AM
Courtnie, you mean to say the columns, chimney, low walls, and the concrete slab have all been removed? Historic Fort Worth knew the shelter was in ruins since the roof burned off in the 1970's, but there was enough there for restoration. Please let me know what is still remaining or what was demolished.
I really would like to know the ins and outs of this procedure. It would be a shame for this football field or the neighborhood towers to just all of a sudden BE GONE. I oppose any decision made by the FWISD to ALLOW a developer to purchase the football stadium and it's property, and then demo it. This field serves a greater purpose than area RE development. Besides, it would only cost a ton more to build a brand new one, and this existing field seems to be just fine as is. FWISD , much like FWCC, should not be meddling about in the RE Development game. Ultimately it SHOULD be up to the taxpayers, as I would be very disappointed if some ISD rep all of a sudden allowed for this to happen overnight. Is FWISD currently seeking alternatives involving Farrington Field? Because if I know this ISD council like I think I do, they will gladly take a raw deal and be stuck with a bond issue to make up for the cost differentials in building a new facility. And guess who pays that buck.
www.iheartfw.com
#42
Posted 02 June 2008 - 06:33 PM
Courtnie, you mean to say the columns, chimney, low walls, and the concrete slab have all been removed? Historic Fort Worth knew the shelter was in ruins since the roof burned off in the 1970's, but there was enough there for restoration. Please let me know what is still remaining or what was demolished.
Hi John,
Looks like it was scraped clean. I will be driving that way tomorrow morning and I will let you know. Also I have recently gained alot of free time and would like to get more involved in Historic Fort Worth, whats the first step?
#43
Posted 03 June 2008 - 10:48 AM
Looks like it was scraped clean. I will be driving that way tomorrow morning and I will let you know. Also I have recently gained alot of free time and would like to get more involved in Historic Fort Worth, whats the first step?
I have been wondering the same thing! What's the scoop?
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#44
Posted 03 June 2008 - 09:45 PM
Courtnie, your comment about Inspiration Point made me very curious; so curious, I drove out there at lunch today to check it out. I have good news. The ruins of the shelter are still standing. No one has destroyed the remains; therefore, there is a chance for restoration.
Now, for those of you wanting to become more involved with Historic Fort Worth, Inc., I would welcome you to get involved. First of all, you have to become a member, if you are not already. You can go to our web site www.historicfortworth.org and get information on our membership levels. I am currently service as Vice Chairman of the organization and I head the Public Affairs Committee. We recently reorganized and change the committee's name. The former name was the Resources and Recognitions Committee. We meet at the Eddleman-McFarland House at 1110 Penn Street on the third Monday of every month at 12:30 PM. We have just recently released an update on the South Side Survey and we need volunteers to take new photographs of our older listing in the survey.
If you don't like to take pictures, I'm sure there are other ways that you can assist the committee and the organization.
#45
Posted 04 June 2008 - 08:49 AM
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#46
Posted 04 June 2008 - 10:11 AM
#47
Posted 04 June 2008 - 10:16 AM
--
Kara B.
#48
Posted 04 June 2008 - 08:54 PM
#49
Posted 05 June 2008 - 11:13 AM
Thanks
Courtnie
#50
Posted 05 June 2008 - 02:19 PM
www.iheartfw.com
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users