113 replies to this topic

[John T Roberts]

Zetna, without giving away too much information, an attorney is looking at the procedure.  I haven't heard any word back from him.

[John T Roberts]

Tonight, the Dillow House case goes before City Council.  If you care about this house, please come down to speak in favor of the keeping of the home's historic and cultural landmark status.

[John T Roberts]

Tonight, the Fort Worth City Council voted to remove the Historic and Cultural Landmark Designation from the Dillow House.  This means that Texas Wesleyan University can demolish it as soon as demolition permits are approved.

[Zetna]

John, it was nice to meet you tonight.....I had hoped that TWU could see they could have their new building and the house too and that their restoration number was exaggerated. It seems that there was a loophole in Landmarks that Joel wasn't aware of and TWU was able to take advantage of....that said, you still seemed to have a little hope after the meeting...any ideas?

[RD Milhollin]

If anyone is planning any donations to TWU in the future it might be advisable to give cash and not historic structures.

 

http://www.star-tele...adlines-default

[cberen1]

What is Texas A&M to College Station but economic development? Should Fort Worth expect nothing less than for its state institutions to play a similar economic development role when they can do so by helping to revitalize or stabilize one of its poor neighborhoods?  State colleges not only develop people but they have also played a role in developing communities: UTA in downtown Arlington, UNT in South Dallas. 

 

Sure, there is an ancillary benefit to the communities from the eceonomic impact of state institutions of higher eduction, but their mandate must be to do what is in the best interests of the school first and foremost.  College Station benefits tremendously from Texas A&M, and is indeed almost 100% dependent on Texas A&M in most respects.  But I would never expect Texas A&M to make a decision about facilities or programs to help the community that would be a detriment to the school.  I feel strongly that moving the law school to the Eastside would be a detriment to the law school. 

 

I lived on the Eastside for a long time and I'm very fond of the area.  I hope for good things and I think they will come.  I think it makes more sense to promote a TCC push in the area.  TCC's mandate is a little more civic in nature.

[Zetna]

Sorry for my cynicism here, but its been a sleep deprived night. I have heard that Landmarks is acting within a week from now to correct the wording that was lost in 2009 that allowed TWU to go directly to Zoning rather than to appeal through Landmarks. If Landmarks can react in a week then why didn't they act and look into the wording when TWU went through Zoning a month ago?....just really odd that no red flags flew until City Council voted last night... Joel seemed surprised; but the rest of the Council seemed in the know......hmmmmmm. Definitely took a major point from the sails of the preservationists! Makes me wonder if TWU lawyers had the city by the you know whats, the City Attourney advised Council on the matter and the Council acted last night just to appease those that came there wanting to save the Dillow House. Kelly Allen Gray, the way she looked down when she spoke seemed to have a scripted response no matter what the public had to say to support preservation of this house. Makes we wonder if everything important that happens is actually behind the scenes and Council's public forum is just for show....if so, TWU had a lot of time to work the city and the preservationists didn't have a chance; we were on a sinking ship anyway......again, sorry for my cynicism.

[John T Roberts]

We knew we were on a sinking ship, but we still allowed our voices to be heard.  Most of the discussion on these cases goes on in the Pre-Council Meetings.  They are open to the public, but the public is not allowed to speak.  They are also available to be viewed online.  You can find the discussion on the city's web site.  I will take a look at it, as well. 

[Zetna]

Here is the pre-council agenda for Feb. 5th.....no mention of the zoning change here.

 

http://www.fortworth...ncil_agenda.asp

[Zetna]

Well, I guess I'm naive about City Council agendas...I looked online for every pre-council meeting since Jan. 8 ...I looked especially at Zoning issues as I hoped to find something where they approved TWU's request to lift the HC status on the house. I could not find anything. So I assume that not every change Zoning approves has to go through City Council....I would have thought that City Council knew there would be an outcry over this house and what Zoning had done and said something in pre-council about it?

[John T Roberts]

I don't know if they discussed the Dillow House case at Pre-Council yesterday, but if they did, you can look at Pre-Council (or any other city meeting) at this site: http://fortworthgov....r.php?view_id=2

 

This is where you might find a recording of what was discussed before the citizen's presentations and public vote.

[Zetna]

Thanks...went through it....the mayor asked if anyone had any questions of Fred Slabach; no one did....Mayor Price asked Fred if he had any questions of the council; he did not, but said he'd be at the meeting and would speak....at the end he said "It's gonna work too".  Again, my ignorance of how this all works makes me wonder why can't the public speak at these pre-council meetings when certain others can? Is it because he is the one involved in the case? It also makes me wonder if wording was left out of Zoning in 2009 and TWU went though Zoning knowing they found a loophole why no council member ever brought that subject up?...I'd be surprised and want to ask questions if I were a council member and knew this would raise a ruckus w/ constituent preservationists.

[John T Roberts]

Since TWU was the applicant, then they have the right to speak at Pre-Council.  As far as I know, no one else is allowed to speak, unless Council requests information from staff. 

 

As for the loophole, I did not know it existed.  I'm betting that TWU found it and used the missing words to their advantage.  Council probably didn't know about the loophole, either, until this case.

[pelligrini]

It is unfortunate that the house will be demolished, after what I saw at the zoning commission hearing I was pretty sure it was a done deal.

 

I seriously doubt that any of the city departments knew of the inconsistencies in the code for the Landmarks Commission as it pertains to historic overlays and the Zoning Commission. I don't think that TWU knew about it either until after their Landmarks case, as the language in their case as posted Here was about removing the HC overlay by the Landmarks Commission.

 

I would really like to hear any council member ask the question "Does that inflated restoration estimate you quoted include the money that you should have spent doing maintenance on your property?" when the applicant is bellyaching about restoration costs on neglected buildings.

[Zetna]

I would have wanted to see a breakdown of that estimate and 2 other estimates. If I was deciding on the fate of a landmark I would of said something at least to council, the public or historic preservation groups in regards to the wording in Landmarks before the council meeting....once TWU circumvented Landmarks appeal there should have been a flurry of questions earlier than last night. I say this in hindsight knowing that council has plenty to deal with in a city as large as Fort Worth, but at the same time there should have been no surprises to council or preservationists regarding the absent language that was dropped for Landmarks in 2009....from what I saw in the pre-council meeting, no one was surprised or questioned TWU's strategy....the only ones surprised were the people that spoke on behalf of the Dillow House when "the rug was pulled from under them".

[John T Roberts]

Pelligrini, I agree with you on when TWU may have discovered the loophole.  If you remember, the applied to the Appeals Board to overturn the original Landmarks Commission decision.  It was then postponed, and then finally withdrawn a couple of months after it was first scheduled to be heard on appeal.  This indicates to me that they discovered the loophole after they filed for the appeal.  Again, the absent language was news to me and I thought that I was fairly well versed on our preservation ordinance.

[Zetna]

I wanted to clarify that the language was dropped from Zoning in 2009.....in one post I said it had dropped from Landmarks....I apologize for any confusion.

[dangr.dave]

An interesting note.  I went by and took some photos of the Dillow House earlier in the week and I took some today again.  I noticed that sometime during the week, the historic medallion by the door was taken off.  I wonder if the city took it back or if some Wesleyan student is now using it as a paperweight. 

[dangr.dave]

Here's a photo of the Dillow House from earlier this week:

 

They're never coming back, are they? by dangr.dave, on Flickr

 

Windows are boarded up.  Could almost hear a voice shouting, "Dead man walking!"

[RD Milhollin]

Historic Fort Worth Sues to Stop Demolition of Dillow House:

 

Was city historic preservation ordinance violated by the city?

 

http://www.star-tele...adlines-default

[Zetna]

Great!...though what's to prevent TWU to bring in bulldozers today? I have heard that council will have to vote on bringing the "dropped language" back into zoning. I still wonder whether this dropped language was even a surprise to council as it was to preservationists...still waiting on an answer as to why no council member asked questions of Fred Slabach or brought up the issue in pre-council meetings after TWU went to zoning in January knowing how preservationists would feel about the Dillow house.

[John T Roberts]

This will probably be my last post on this subject until the lawsuit is settled.  I will continue to read all of the postings on this thread and I will administer the topic, as well.  Zetna, I can't answer any of your questions, except for one.  I can answer your first one.  Until the case is heard, absolutely nothing.  I hope that the discussion continues here on the forum regarding this historically important house.

[hannerhan]

I know I'm in the minority here but I wish they would go ahead and scrape it and get this done with.  The last thing TWU needs to be doing at this point is spending dollars defending lawsuits.

 

Disclaimer: I love architecture and historic buildings, have spent a significant amount of time inside Dillow, and am a TWU alum. 

[Zetna]

The suit is against the City of Fort Worth, not TWU

[hannerhan]

The suit is against the City of Fort Worth, not TWU

 

Ahh, thanks.  It does seem like FW pulled a fast one on this deal and that this sets a bad precedent so I have no problem with the suit.  But if I'm TWU I tear Dillow down asap. 

[Zetna]

Maybe so....I'd like to think that with the publicity this house is getting....maybe thinking about his plans for the block and how they could coincide w/ the house remaining....the importance of the Dillow family to TWU and the Poly area ...it is the grandest house over there and it is structurally sound.....maybe Fred Slabach could be convinced keeping the place could be of benefit to TWU, the Poly area and to Fort Worth.....maybe I'm naive that way, but I like to think that.

[mmiller2002]

It's not a particularly attractive style, though...too bad they can't give it away to someone who would move it.

[Zetna]

Yeah, if it could be moved that would be great, but it seems an expensive option. The style may not be for everyone....it's a foursquare...my neighborhood has a lot of these, but they are in wood, yet protected by historic status....this is a grand one....when it was built in 1912 I'm sure it was considered very modern as 10 years earlier people were still building Victorian houses w/ all the embellishments.....this isn't as modern as Frank Lloyd Wrights houses from the same period, but details such as the top of the brick columns show the designer was being influenced by Wright and a more modern era than the Victorians. I hear the woodwork inside, especially the staircase, is very nice.

[McHand]

An interesting note.  I went by and took some photos of the Dillow House earlier in the week and I took some today again.  I noticed that sometime during the week, the historic medallion by the door was taken off.  I wonder if the city took it back or if some Wesleyan student is now using it as a paperweight. 

 

 

Not me, although It would be a nice souvenir.

 

It is a plain house, although I only think it's ugly because of the boarded windows.  And they stay boarded and all people see is a big old house with ugly windows.

 

I am torn on this issue, as a Wesleyan student and as a lover of early 20th century architecture.

 

If Historic Fort Worth wins its suit and ties Wesleyan's hands, what benefit is that to anyone?  Wesleyan's mind won't be changed on this, or the house would not be in the shape it's in.  

With all due love and respect to HFW, I'm afraid they will come off looking like a busybody organization that wants to bully people into keeping structures standing that they don't want or can't afford.

[Zetna]

Awy, I agree a lot of its "ugliness" is in the boarded up windows....a lot of it is also the neglect over the last several years, but it's still structurally sound. The house became a Historic Landmark in 1990, the house was given to TWU by the Dillow family.....the house w/ its family history w/ TWU and the Poly area is what helps make it a structure to be preserved.....it has not lost that history..I'll bet TWU takes care of its other structures just fine; why not this one?...w/ 38 million in endowments and a possible additional 25 million if the agreement w/ Texas A&M Law School goes through; restoring that house or making it part of the overall scheme is a drop in the bucket compared to their new office building and new campus entry....besides $800,000 to restore that house is an incredible figure and I still wonder what that bid is based on and if they got other bids. I don't think HFW looks like a "bully" ...they are not suing TWU...the city dropped the ball by dropping language from zoning back in 2007 that would have helped this house. I think TWU looks bad in that they found this "loophole" and took advantage of it rather than going through Landmarks again....TWU can't prove this house is any less significant than it was in 1990, nor can they prove that they are under economic hardship....the lots they have are sufficient for the building and parking...I think Slabach just wants it out of the way.

[dangr.dave]

It's not a particularly attractive style, though...too bad they can't give it away to someone who would move it.

 

I don't know if a brick house would move as well as a stone house. Good idea though.  And, moving it might cost about the same as the $800k to restore it.  They could drop it off on a lot in Fairmont or the Southside.

[McHand]

I think Slabach just wants it out of the way.

 

 

I agree with you on Slabach.  I think he has family ties to the university but essentially he's a new Sheriff in town who doesn't see the value in the house the way others do.

 

To answer another question, I doubt that Wesleyan has taken immaculate care of its other historic resources.  It is simply that the others (Admin building, Ann Waggoner/Martin Hall, Dan Waggoner) have been in continuous use by the university since being built.  Dan Waggoner was a dorm before it became the Education building, and Martin Hall, although built as a church, was converted to the music building in the 20's and never looked back.

The Dillow house was a private residence that only recently (35 years ago) came into its possession.  Perhaps, deep down, the university never really knew what to do with it.  It is obvious there was no long-term plan for this house because either A) It would still be fulfilling that purpose, or the fight to remove designation would have been fought before now.

 

I don't mean to keep playing Devil's advocate about it, but like I said before, I am torn on this issue.  

 

What the house really needs is some vocal neighbors to write and appear before the Council. 

 

OR - for $11K, Historic Fort Worth should buy it and at least secure the property until restoration funds can be raised.

[Zetna]

Awy, the house until the mid 2000's was an alumni facility... I still think it can be used for events and the upstairs as rooms for visiting professors...I would think the university works with the community and it would be a nice vintage backdrop for community interface events....look at the Eddleman-McFarland house on Penn St. The Dillow house wouldn't have to be as "public" a place, but could serve the east side....what an asset it could be in that neighborhood.

 

I like your idea of selling it to someone, but again I think Slabach would hate the idea of losing a TWU lot and also hate the look of a vintage home against some modern office building...I personally like that eclectic look especially if the new building "borrows" some design elements of the old one, but many people don't like that look or want the freedom to do what they want architecturally without having to appease the new design to a historic structure.

[McHand]

I think you are right about Slabach, he simply wants it gone no matter what.

[mmiller2002]

It's not a particularly attractive style, though...too bad they can't give it away to someone who would move it.

 

I don't know if a brick house would move as well as a stone house. Good idea though.  And, moving it might cost about the same as the $800k to restore it.  They could drop it off on a lot in Fairmont or the Southside.

My point would be that it's not wanted where it is by the owners.  If some supporter of HFW would put up the money to move it, then the landowner could get on with their plans for their land with their money.

[pelligrini]

My point would be that it's not wanted where it is by the owners.  If some supporter of HFW would put up the money to move it, then the landowner could get on with their plans for their land with their money.

 

I don't like telling a landowner what they must do with their property, but this particular property isn't the same as most. It was deemed a historical and cultural landmark. With that designation there comes certain responsibilities by the owner (I'd call them a steward). For this particular property, TWU has failed in being a good steward.

 

I'm not entirely sure if HFW's suit against the City is just for saving the Dillow House. I haven't read the suit, but I would think it is more about overriding the Landmarks Commission in this case and how the City's Historic laws are to work for other cases.

[RD Milhollin]

S-T editorial on Dillow House / Historical Preservation lawsuit:

 

http://www.star-tele...attle-over.html

[cberen1]

It's not a particularly attractive style, though...too bad they can't give it away to someone who would move it.

 

I'd like to argue with the attractiveness comment.  Apart from the porch extending to the left I think it has lovely symmetry and nice, clean lines.  Very few homes in that condition will look good.  In good condition with a nice tile roof and clean land scaping this house is attractive.  I imagine some stone planter boxes on the porch walls, large garden urns at the base of the stairs and hanging planters on the rail of the balcony.  I think the whole place could look great.

[McHand]

What about the fire damage? Wesleyan claims it's beyond repair but others claim not.  It either is or it isn't.  Anyone have details?

[dangr.dave]

Speaking of fire damage...I wonder if it'll "mysteriously" burn down at some point.

[Zetna]

awy, the house is still very structurally sound....there are many houses in my neighborhood that have suffered much worse that have been restored and for much less money than it is reported to have to spend on the Dillow house.

 

dangr.dave, that is how they've dealt w/ certain historic properties in Dallas...I am hoping Fort Worth w/ all its growing pains is better than Dallas.

[Zetna]

http://www.star-tele...fort-worth.html

 

[RD Milhollin]

A state district judge has advised Historic Fort Worth to sue TWU over the removal of the historic designation for Dillow House:

 

http://www.star-tele...adlines-default

[McHand]

Slabach seems sincere.  I back off from my judgment. He does seem to have the university at heart.  

 

Obviously, TWU is not TCU financially.  So the funds probably aren't there.  I think, if it were, Dillow would have come down long ago ,and the Methodist center would be built and open by now.

 

I don't know what to make of a SD Judge advising to sue.  Is HFW looking to acquire the property one day?  If not, then it needs to help find a donor or focus energies elsewhere, because without an angel, there is no hope for this house.

[Zetna]

Awy, no TWU is not TCU financially  but the Dillow House was used by TWU until 2005, Slabach did not become president until 2011. If TWU has funds for the new office building, a campus entry, ect., then why doesn't TWU have the funds for reuse of the Dillow? Remember, there is an $800,000 number out there, but where did it come from, where are competitive bids?...it just seems like a bogus number compared to restorations of other similar houses in my neighborhood...almost like the inflated number was used to prove "financial hardship" to Landmarks. I'm sure Fred does have the university at heart, but I don't think he's very sincere on this video. Look at the pre-council meeting for Feb 5, 2013 and his last comment is like let's get it done before the actual council session. Rather than go through the proper channels of a Landmarks appeal process he ( or others) used a loophole in Zoning. I think Fred is receiving a lot of flack for this and this is the reason for his video. Sorry, I may be jaded, but have seen this type of manipulation of the public before....notice how he's saying he'll give a couple of months before they tear the house down...I think he's waiting until the flack dies down so he can proceed w/ demolition thinking interest will have subsided....of course maybe it will give time for a buyer or funds. I've said it before, with the land they have now there is no need for the demolition of this house for the size of project they want to build on that side of Rosedale.  I think Slabach just wants it gone so all his new stuff looks visually palatable to him. 

[beverlyb]

Contains quotes from at least one Fort Worth forum member....http://www.fwweekly....3/classy-house/

The $800,000 figure for restoration is pretty shocking.

[McHand]

All I know is, on Friday, I am going to attend a spaghetti dinner to raise money for things the music building needs, like more lockers and other such equipment for the band.  We are probably going to raise about $1,000 if we're lucky.  

 

Texas Wesleyan is not swimming in money.

 

Ironically, it is not hard to find student support for saving the house.  In my department there are two fraternities who would love a headquarters, for example.

 

But where is the money?

 

Perhaps $800,000 is a full restoration.  I believe most would be happy to just see it renovated so that it can remain standing  Even so, no one is allotting the funds.

 

To me, the tragedy of the Dillow House is a total trust in a landmark system that, in the end, seems to merely put a plaque on a structure and delay its eventual demolition.

[Zetna]

beverlyb - Thanks for the article. I thought it was interesting that the company CEO who provided the $800,000 bid is a TWU board member. I think it would be interesting to see a bid breakdown along with two other competitive bids. I think it's an amazing number considering the house is structurally sound....maybe that company doesn't do residential work and throws money at the bid to cover their butts...I've seen that done, but that is a lot of money. The article, as in other articles, also states that the property is needed for the new campus entryway; untrue as the new campus entryway is on the other side of the street centered on the current campus lawn. I couldn't have said it better as one of the commenters "it doesn’t seem quite proper that anyone should be able to seek and obtain an historical designation when it suits their purposes, and then allow the designated property to fall quickly into disrepair and decay so that it can no longer be economically maintained and have no choice but to be destroyed when it NO LONGER suits their purposes."

 

awy - I don't know how a university dispense its funds....currently the university has a 38 million dollar endowment...what does that mean, where does it go? I still find it funny they have the money to build the new entryway and office building, but not incorporate the Dillow house into the scheme. I don't know of anyone, except TWU, that knows what that $800,000 number covers or how they came up w/ that number. I can think of all sorts of uses for it and it looks like 2 fraternities you know of need headquarters. BTW, the building, if restored, can receive 10 years of tax credits which can be renewed every 20 years and that's just the city taxes...I'm sure there are federal monies and grant monies available...it's not just a plaque...there are resources available for historic properties, but one has to want to work towards restoration and not demolition....... good luck w/ your spaghetti dinner on Friday.

[Doohickie]

All I know is, on Friday, I am going to attend a spaghetti dinner to raise money for things the music building needs, like more lockers and other such equipment for the band.  We are probably going to raise about $1,000 if we're lucky.  
 
Texas Wesleyan is not swimming in money.
 
Ironically, it is not hard to find student support for saving the house.  In my department there are two fraternities who would love a headquarters, for example.
 
But where is the money?
 
Perhaps $800,000 is a full restoration.  I believe most would be happy to just see it renovated so that it can remain standing  Even so, no one is allotting the funds.
 
To me, the tragedy of the Dillow House is a total trust in a landmark system that, in the end, seems to merely put a plaque on a structure and delay its eventual demolition.

We plan to be there for the dinner. See you there, maybe?

[McHand]

I wonder how much $ was raised? :-)

 

I like Duke Lane's comment on the FW Weekly article.  Please scroll up to the link and read it....I don't want to break any forum rules by quoting.