1105 replies to this topic

[John T Roberts]

Mr_Brightside, yes the Swift buildings could possibly be restored; however, there are two problems.  Those buildings have never been protected from demolition and the owner currently has approved wrecking permits for all of the buildings on the site.  The owner has not offered to restore any non-protected historic buildings.  Their site plans show all new construction at the Swift site.  It may be too late to save them.

 

This morning, I attended a meeting of UTA and TCU students at the monumental stair on NE 23rd Street.  The stair and wall are really nice pieces of concrete and masonry craftsmanship.  It was really fun to get together with the students.

[David_H]

I'll be sorry to see the water tower go - it is very much a feature of that part of Exchange Avenue, even though the neon sign currently attached to it is very tacky. Is the water tower original to the area or is a replica, attempting to provide a more old western vibe?

 

The stairway is really cool and I hope will remain a feature of the new development on the site. How long ago was the logo painted over? Other than that, the stairs seem to be in very good shape. 

 

 

[John T Roberts]

The logo was tagged within the last two years, then the city came in with their standard gray graffiti cover-up paint and painted the entire panel.

[John T Roberts]

Last Friday, I met with the professors who wrote this editorial and their students at the old Swift Plant.  The editorial appeared in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

 

http://www.star-tele...le50148300.html

[Volare]

Pleased to see the Mill City Museum getting a shout out in that article.

[RD Milhollin]

It would be interesting to see what sort of design for a public performance/event space the UTA architecture students could come up with if this was presented as a class project. Perhaps they could be tasked with including TEXRail transit station within the proposal as well.

 

I am a little hesitant regarding the references I have seen to mixed-use development in the stockyards as multi-unit residential was not a part of the original mix of uses within the zone, outside of hotels (or am I wrong in this). With the noise of bars, trains, tourists and traffic today I don't think this would be a great place to live, just as in the day the smell would have put off those of more genteel tastes. There are certainly open spaces, vacant lots, semi-paved parking lots etc. within easy walking distance of the historic core that could be used for historically-appearing mixed use construction that could include low to middle income housing for those who work in the service industry that thrives in the Stockyards.

[John T Roberts]

RD, I have been to so many Stockyards meetings, my memory is failing me.  However, I do think that residential was a part of Fort Worth Heritage's (Majestic/Hickman Partnership) original proposals. The residential component is slated for the Swift site, as best that I can remember.

[Mr_Brightside526]

Last Friday, I met with the professors who wrote this editorial and their students at the old Swift Plant.  The editorial appeared in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

 

http://www.star-tele...le50148300.html

 

This is exactly what I had in mind as far as conserving the swift buildings. If the developer would incorporate them into a build out of other office, retail, and residential buildings of similar architecture style, then you would have a cool part of town similar to OKC's Bricktown (sans the river walk).

[renamerusk]

Pleased to see the Mill City Museum getting a shout out in that article.

 

The credit goes to you [post#281].

 

This is a great and practical forum that is being read by non-members as well.

[John T Roberts]

On Thursday, December 17th, the Urban Design Commission approved the Stockyards Standards and Design Guidelines with some changes.   Fort Worth Business has the story below:

 

http://www.fortworth...c3008f00dd.html

[Dylan]

From what I could tell, nothing was being torn down as of yesterday. The water tower and bull-riding thing are still standing.

 

Unfortunately, my photo hosting site's watermarks recently got much worse, so I will not be posting any pics.

[John T Roberts]

I rode my bicycle through the area today, and from what I could tell from the roads was that nothing had been demolished.

[John T Roberts]

Scott Nishimura at Fort Worth Texas Magazine has been researching for weeks on the Stockyards.  His article is linked below that details the latest happenings.

 

http://www.fwtx.com/.../history-making

[John T Roberts]

The Stockyards made the Star-Telegram's 2015 year in review.

 

http://www.star-tele...le52111090.html

 

Today's FW Weekly has another story on the Stockyards:

 

http://www.fwweekly....n-preservation/

[JBB]

I still have to applaud the city for moving forward despite the protests of some of the influential property owners. I'm all for the rights of the property owner while understanding that owning historic property comes with a stewardship responsibility. This whole process isn't and hasn't been perfect, but I feel that the overall impression at the end will be a positive one.

[John T Roberts]

If any of you have been keeping up with the Stockyards and the public meetings, the creation of the local historic district was scheduled to go before the Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission this month.  The day of the commission meeting is Monday.  I'm providing a link to the information that the H&CLC will review on Monday.  The meeting is at the City Council Chambers at 2:00 PM.  The PDF from the City's website is 71 pages in length, but it includes the 1976 National Register Historic District Nomination.  The city has prepared a very good map that shows the proposed local historic district and all of the contributing and non-contributing structures, both within the district boundaries and outside of it.  However, please note that this map does not indicate the 23 buildings with wrecking permits that have been approved.  There is nothing that can stop those demolitions because they were approved before any official action was taken for the historic district.

 

http://fortworthtexa.../Stockyards.pdf

[John T Roberts]

The Landmarks Commission hearing on the Stockyards was held yesterday afternoon.  Several people spoke asking that the proposed historic district be reduced in size.  Several others spoke to request the historic district be enlarged in size.  Historic Fort Worth requested the enlargement of the boundary.  HFW has been doing its own historic resource survey for the Stockyards.  After everyone spoke, the Landmarks Commission voted to delay their vote on the historic district boundaries.  A special meeting will be held in a couple of weeks to further discuss the matter.  For more information on the meeting, you can read Sandra Baker's article from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

 

http://www.star-tele...le54211815.html

 

Fort Worth Business has followed up with their article and you can read that from the link below:

 

http://www.fortworth...00261b940a.html

[Austin55]

Really hoping the larger boundary passes.

[John T Roberts]

The Zoning Commission is hearing the design guidelines and district portion of the case today.  There are little nuances going on with the city's system.  For more information, you might want to check out the Save our Stockyards Facebook page.

[John T Roberts]

I was a part of this interview conducted on January 4th by the FW Weekly.  We talked about the unique buildings within the Stockyards area.  The link is below. 

 

http://www.fwweekly....living-history/

[RD Milhollin]

Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission votes to recommend including the Swift and Armour plant sites in historic district; "Meatpacking District" :

 

http://www.star-tele...le57370968.html

 

Alternative boundaries for the district were submitted by Historic Fort Worth, Inc.

[johnfwd]

The Commission's vote last Monday to enlarge the historic district boundaries is reported in Fort Worth Business.

 

http://www.fortworth...d431b9395b.html

[Doohickie]

What does this mean for the structures that are little more than ruins?

[RD Milhollin]

Doug Harman slams developer and city council in S-T Op-Ed:

 

http://www.star-tele...le60139121.html

 

Former city manager and CVB leader writes that council is laying down for "Disneyland-style" developer at the expense of Fort Worth's authentic heritage.

[JBB]

Wow. That's pretty tough talk from someone that many would consider pretty plugged in to the FW establishment. He makes several good points about the attitude toward development in general, but I think that the council has exceeded expectations (which were admittedly molten core of the earth low) in this particular case.

I'm not sure the expanded boundary does anything to protect the ruins, but maybe it helps at least protect the wall and staircase on the south end of the property. I thought demolition permits for the remaining ruins were already a done deal.

[renamerusk]

Scary for sure!  If they get this wrong, it will be impossible to reverse the damage to an organic and near perfect historic district.

[360texas]

Having actually visited architectural areas: Japan, Philippines, Hong Kong China, Thailand, England, France, Spain, Germany (lived here for 3 years), Italy, Sicily, Austria, Switzerland, Netherlands, Turkey, Greece, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia (lived and worked for 13 years), Bahrain, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, India, Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Nearly all US States including Alaska and then Canada, and Pyramid areas of Mexico.  

 

However, we do not consider ourselves an authority on this Historic Stock Yards issue. 

 

I think that most of the aging permanent brick and mortar structures in the Fort Worth Stock yards appear to be convincingly worth being called "historic" and might be entitled a real 'Historic District'.  The remaining stock yard structures appear to only worthy of "Tourist" attractions.

 

Now we take a step back... only to try to understand the "historic criteria" and other folks opinions. 

[Austin55]

Here's a PDF from the zoning commission with details abiut the plans for restoring the Mule Barns.

 

http://www.fortworth...7/ZC-16-031.pdf

[renamerusk]

When there is uncertainty, as there is with the "Stockyards Redux",  trust the architectural firm of Bennett  Benner + Partners to be aware;  I do.

[Mr_Brightside526]

I took some photos of the Swift ruins on my way back into Meacham.

 

 

[Austin55]

http://fortworthtexa...60309Zoning.pdf

 

Quite a few stockyards related items on the zoning agenda for March.

[qmcgown]

Thanks, Mr. Brightside for the updated aerials. I was going to post a 1951 aerial from the same view for comparison, but I cannot for the life of me get the image to upload. If it can't be done with a fountain pen and a nice piece of paper, I'm clearly out of my depth.

[Austin55]

KERA article on today's zoning hearing.

 

http://keranews.org/...storic-district

[Austin55]

Zoning commission approved the larger boundary.

[johnfwd]

Zoning commission approved the larger boundary.

 

And the City Council will likely approve it, as well.  I applaud the zoning commission's decision.  My earlier stated opinion is that the historical aspect of the Stockyards should not be further "diluted" by modern commercial development.  I just wish these project developers would have focused their attention on the more appropriate tracts further south--on Panther Island.

[youngalum]

So Ms. Willis wants to keep dilapidated ruins that are a danger to the area as a means to tell visitors the history--all while it sits behind fencing and shows nothing discernible besides a stairwell?

 

Seems reasonable to throw out the proposed development on such visionary thinking of looking at failing down buildings.

 

If it was so historical, why hasn't the historical society or the its backers put their own money into saving the buildings?  Cause they are not worth saving and no banker would loan $ on such a foolish endeavor.

[JBB]

Those dilapidated ruins are going to be torn down whether the expanded boundary is passed or not. I'm not sure why that's even a part of this discussion. The permits are in hand to make that happen.

[RD Milhollin]

Star-Telegram story on the Zoning Commission recommendation including map of the two alternatives presented:

 

http://Community Bre...ss Dallas Texas

 

The sites of the Swift and Armour plants have been approved for apartments, along with demolition permits for the few structures remaining of the Swift property. I repeat my hope that this new development with be required to be built to the same scale as the demolished plants so residents and visitors can have some idea of what this place used to look like; requiring red brick cladding would help achieve this aim during daylight hours.

 

http://www.fortworth...ourpens1913.jpg

 

http://www.fortworth...earlyswifts.jpg

[Volare]

Those dilapidated ruins are going to be torn down whether the expanded boundary is passed or not. I'm not sure why that's even a part of this discussion. The permits are in hand to make that happen.

 

And the developer has made it quite clear that they will get around whatever restrictions the City puts in place.

[renamerusk]

Why, for heaven's sake, is there a need for apartments?

[JBB]

While I don't think there are people clamoring for apartments in the Stockyards, the idea is that a mixed use development with retail, office, and residential will result in a more successful development. Let's all hope the apartments are along the lines of W. 7th and not typical, suburban style apartments.

[Mr_Brightside526]

While I don't think there are people clamoring for apartments in the Stockyards, the idea is that a mixed use development with retail, office, and residential will result in a more successful development. Let's all hope the apartments are along the lines of W. 7th and not typical, suburban style apartments.

 

I would hope these apartments actually go beyond what has been built on W 7th. I too hope they incorporate large amounts of red brick and larger warehouse style windows to give this section of the city a different feel and stay true to its character.

[Austin55]

 

 

 large amounts of red brick

 

 

Someone get David Schwarz on the line.

[JBB]

While I don't think there are people clamoring for apartments in the Stockyards, the idea is that a mixed use development with retail, office, and residential will result in a more successful development. Let's all hope the apartments are along the lines of W. 7th and not typical, suburban style apartments.

 
I would hope these apartments actually go beyond what has been built on W 7th. I too hope they incorporate large amounts of red brick and larger warehouse style windows to give this section of the city a different feel and stay true to its character.

When I said "along the lines of W. 7th", I was referring to the fact that they're urban and not pods of units surrounded by parking lots, well-done, nice quality, look built to last. Obviously, they don't need to look just like them.

[renamerusk]

While I don't think there are people clamoring for apartments in the Stockyards, the idea is that a mixed use development with retail, office, and residential will result in a more successful development. Let's all hope the apartments are along the lines of W. 7th and not typical, suburban style apartments.

 

 You are hoping for a miracle.

[Mr_Brightside526]

It's a difference of opinion. I think they look cheap compared to what you see in Houston's Midtown, Oklahoma City's Bricktown or San Diego's Little Italy urban neighborhoods. It seems like Fort Worth developers are always either afraid to take the risk of making something of quality and architectural interest, or it's really just that easy to throw something up and make a buck off the residents because they don't care and are just happy to call themselves "urban."

 

Oh my, you've made me turn all pessimistic.

[renamerusk]

[Stockyards] - the idea is that a mixed use development with retail, office, and residential will result in a more successful development.......

 

Of course, I have suggested out loud this question: "What is really wrong with the Stockyards?; when to me it is striving and quite successful as is under its own momentum.

 

Development for the sake of development is bound to go awry.  Ask yourself, "what is the life expectancy of an apartment project?

 

Preservation/restoration should be the goal; not changing it into another W7th. Imagine the horror should the core land within the Cultural District was slated for apartment development.

[JBB]

How did my mere mention of W. 7th as a quality mixed use development get twisted into my wanting to turn the Stockyards into W. 7th?  Forget I even mentioned it.  I'm just citing it as a pretty decent development that hasn't ended up all that bad despite coming together in the midst of the economy and real estate market taking a huge crap.  

 

I don't personally think there's anything wrong with the Stockyards.  I also don't own all of that mostly vacant land right next to a successful development with a captive audience in place.  I don't think the development is necessary, but I see why it's happening.  

 

As for what everything new looks like, I'm willing to wait and see what the city does with the ball in their court.  So far they've taken their time and far exceeded everyone's expectations as far as the historic overlay and form based codes go.  If this was a development going at Heritage Trace and I-35, it would have opened a year ago.

 

"core land"?  Sure, if you ignore everything west of Packers St.  This is like apartments on the north side of Camp Bowie (which there are), not on the lawn at the Kimbell.

[renamerusk]

How did my mere mention of W. 7th as a quality mixed use development get twisted into my wanting to turn the Stockyards into W. 7th?  Forget I even mentioned it.  I'm just citing it as a pretty decent development that hasn't ended up all that bad despite coming together in the midst of the economy and real estate market taking a huge crap.  

 

I don't personally think there's anything wrong with the Stockyards.  I also don't own all of that mostly vacant land right next to a successful development with a captive audience in place.  I don't think the development is necessary, but I see why it's happening.  

 

As for what everything new looks like, I'm willing to wait and see what the city does with the ball in their court.  So far they've taken their time and far exceeded everyone's expectations as far as the historic overlay and form based codes go.  If this was a development going at Heritage Trace and I-35, it would have opened a year ago.

 

"core land"?  Sure, if you ignore everything west of Packers St.  This is like apartments on the north side of Camp Bowie (which there are), not on the lawn at the Kimbell.

 

[renamerusk]

 

[Stockyards] - the idea is that a mixed use development with retail, office, and residential will result in a more successful development.......

 

Preservation/restoration should be the goal; not changing it into another W7th. Imagine the horror should the core land within the Cultural District was slated for apartment development.

 

 

My nay-say stance comes from their plans to change the identity of the Stockyards (FWSY). 

 

I have always seen the FWSY as purely a retail/entertainment destination.  By this developer introducing a residential component within the boundary of the Stockyards District, they are creating the potential for problems associated with servicing tenant needs that are incompatible with the current identity of the FWSY.