69 replies to this topic

[John T Roberts]

We're all going into this process with an open mind.

[safly]

Why not place the city facilities at the ITC. That joke of a car rental place is not doing any business there, especially on the weekends. They can surely add-on some 4 story endcaps to the ITC for other dept's. The problem with the current location of CH is the lack of VERTICAL use, being a 2 or 3 story tall and horizontally stunted worthless piece of engineering. They should go for broke, but go for SMART broke. Doing that then you should take over the ITC and CONSOLIDATE, not decentralize. ITC would make a PERFECT fit and would add to the DTFW canvas. Not to mention the COINvenient parking and access to the T.

Another effective effort is to recognize and research exactly how growing Southlake is fitting all of their city functionality needs in a building less than half the size of FWMuni. Is our city employment too big for it's britches? Are we IN-effecient at City Hall?

Just some ideas to throw around.

[ghughes]

So what is the status of this idea?

And by the way, safly, the ITC is not owned by the city. It belongs to The T. So expanding it for city use would be a bureaucratic nightmare!

[safly]

Happy New Year!

[ghughes]

And Happy NEW YEAR to you, tambien!

[David Love]

I can see it moving to the Lancaster area, but not in an existing structure. They'll need one that’s designed for ease of use and easy to secure, any existing government structure will be riddled with security issues.

Talk about a windfall for those that invested in that part of town though :-)

[cberen1]

Talk about a windfall for those that invested in that part of town though :-)

I think St. Patrick's Cathedral owns several small parcels over there.

I've often wondered how you get the land out of a church's hands. Look at the Methodist church, for example. They own a ton of land which is just getting more valuable every day. Its primary use is for parking. Is that the land's highest use? Probably not, but I can't imagine that the tax-free entity is really concerned. They have no pressing financial concerns, but parking is an issue. So why not just keep the expensive land for surface parking.

St. Pat's is in a little different situation because, while financially stable, they are not as well off. Also, their property, as I understand it, is not in one, large contigous block(s). I think they own smaller broken up chunks. Maybe they would be willing to sell for the right price.

[Bernd]

I voted no, but it was a tough vote to make. The building certainly is worthy of a greater function than it now serves, but I understand from other posts that all city offices won't fit over there.

Separating council chambers and offices from the rest of the city offices just doesn't seem practical to me.

[Fire-Eater]

No, No, No, No! No City Hall in Post Office! City Hall needs to purchase and renovate the T&P Warehouse. Bureaucrats don't need windows! That place is perfect for a BILLION cubicles!

The warehouse is not being used, nobody wants it, and it can handle city hall space needs for the next century!

[JBB]

Somebody has mentioned this before, but I'm not sure the best use for the warehouse is one that calls for it to be removed from the property tax rolls.

[hooked]

Is tax being paid on the property now?

[Fire-Eater]

Is tax being paid on the property now?

If not, I will move in, pay taxes, and proclaim it mine. Squatters' Rights!

[Fire-Eater]

Somebody has mentioned this before, but I'm not sure the best use for the warehouse is one that calls for it to be removed from the property tax rolls.

For historic preservation purposes, I think the city can afford to give up a few property taxes . . . considering that it's a landmark building, I don't see why not. ESPECIALLY since the city had $13+ million to throw away on the Montgomery Plaza project -- $13 million that the feds would have ponied up if the project had been done within historic preservation guidelines. Sounds like they've got PLENTY of money if they can afford to line developers' pockets with cash like that!

This city is all talk and no do when it comes to HP. I'm disgusted. It won't even designate the Will Rogers as a protected property. I hear Mr. Bass was hinting around last week about needing a new rodeo coliseum for the Stock Show. Don't be surprised if a city engineer comes in and finds the historic facility in such poor condition that renovations will not meet cost-benefit guidelines. Solution: tear it down and build a new one!

There are no sacred cows (pun intended) of architecture in this city.

Renovating and occupying the T&P Warehouse for offices would be a symbolic step (and just penance) by the city in recognizing its multitude of sins with respect to preserving this city's architectural heritage.

[John T Roberts]

I agree with you, Kip. However, the committee is really just focusing on the Post Office and the other options explained in the Star-Telegram. It is really not large enough to handle all of the functions within the current City Hall. Supposedly, the owner of the warehouse has a development plan in place.

By the way, it's good to have you posting here again!

[mosteijn]

I was originally a huge fan of moving city hall to the post office. The building just looks like a city hall. But if they're keeping the current building (and the other office space) and just expanding to the post office, then I think it's a horrible move. Isn't one of the complaints about the current situation how spread out everything is? How is getting more space further away from current city hall going to solve that?

Now, the city could make the post office work, but I think it would require some new construction closer to the post office, to make a sort of "complex" (but not in the brutalist, "urban renewal" sense of the word.) If not, I think the city would be better suited to build a brand new building somewhere else - perhaps with space to spare. I mean, what's going to happen in 25, 30 years when 430,000 sf isn't enough?

[John T Roberts]

Constructing a new building is the most expensive option, but it is still on the table. On the surface, it may be short sighted to move city departments further apart from each other, but with advances in technology, in 25-30 years, the city may not need as much space as it needs now. In 2037, all city business may be done by communicating to an implanted chip in your brain that talks to the city's super computer and all your paperwork is then printed in your house.

[Fire-Eater]

Constructing a new building is the most expensive option, but it is still on the table. On the surface, it may be short sighted to move city departments further apart from each other, but with advances in technology, in 25-30 years, the city may not need as much space as it needs now. In 2037, all city business may be done by communicating to an implanted chip in your brain that talks to the city's super computer and all your paperwork is then printed in your house.

How many square feet is the old warehouse?

John! Good point about the brain-chip thing.

[John T Roberts]

I calculated the square footage from the known building dimensions and came up with 549,900 gross square feet. TAD says it has 549,452 gross square feet.

[cberen1]

In 2037, all city business may be done by communicating to an implanted chip in your brain that talks to the city's super computer and all your paperwork is then printed in your house.

I, for one, think this is one of the funnier things John has ever posted.

[RD Milhollin]

The idea of acquiring the old Post Office as a new City Hall made the 10:00 PM news on Channel 5 tonight. Looks like 185,000 sq. ft. on a rent-to-own plan, developer to do considerable restoration work. The current city hall would be retained to house consolidated city offices currently housed in remote locations. Couldn't find a link on the television news web page.