100 replies to this topic

[texastrill]

That place looks like a city hall to me.The current city hall reminds of the old Stripling and Cox dept. stores.

[Dallastar]

[quote name='vjackson' date='Dec 4 2006, 11:05 AM' post='32036']
[quote name='texastrill' post='32034' date='Dec 4 2006, 12:38 PM']
leaning monster in Dallas is ridiculous. Houston's historic art deco city hall remains one of my favorites. It reminds me of the famous art deco Police Dept. building in L.A. (It's been featured in several movies)
[/quote]

Hey Vjack, the Dallas City Hall was in the first "Robo Cop", however, when it appeared in the movie it had like a 70 story building on top of it. They tried to make that 70's looking building look furturistic.

[John T Roberts]

At our last City Facilities Committee meeting, we discussed the possibilities of using the Post Office for a City Hall. Carter+Burgess was asked to look a little closer on what city functions and spaces could fit within the building. Obviously, in order to do what the committee asked, they had to go back to City Council to amend their contract for the additional scope of work.

[mosteijn]

I kind of like the idea of using the Post Office to house the higher level offices and functions (like the chamber itself) and either using part of the T&P building for the bulk of the offices or building a new annex, because I'm not sure moving the currently cramped employees of a growing city from one 200,000 sf space to another will really solve anything. Using a building for city functions doesn't preclude it from having an interactive streetscape - as Austin did with its AMAZING new city hall (which features some retail space, amongst other pedestrian amenities).

[John T Roberts]

I think C+B will mainly look at putting only the ceremonial functions in the Post Office. Depending on the recommendations, the remainder of city facilities may remain in their current locations, or they will move to another building. I think using the warehouse for the remainder of functions is certainly a possibility, but it depends on whether the current owner will sell or lease the building to the city.

[Fort Worthology]

Well, this is a disappointment. I really didn't want to see City Hall move to the Post Office. Though, the indications that the USPS would retain its branch there are fairly promising, so maybe it's not a total loss.

[cberen1]

Isn't the back part of the Post Office wide open space? You could put a large fancy meeting space in it for public forum meetings (like the house chamber). I don't know if we need anything like that, but that might fit in with the style and ambiance of the building.

Just a thought.

[Keller Pirate]

[quote name='Dallastar' date='Dec 4 2006, 11:53 AM' post='32039']
[quote name='vjackson' date='Dec 4 2006, 11:05 AM' post='32036']
[quote name='texastrill' post='32034' date='Dec 4 2006, 12:38 PM']
leaning monster in Dallas is ridiculous. Houston's historic art deco city hall remains one of my favorites. It reminds me of the famous art deco Police Dept. building in L.A. (It's been featured in several movies)
[/quote]


The art deco police building in L.A. you are talking about actually is the City Hall. It has played the police dept. in many TV shows and movies. The police building is a rectangular glass building from the late 60's. It was seen on Dragnet. The police dept. may have been in the city hall at one time but not at least for 50 years.

The city hall is 32 floors, 454 feet tall and completed in 1928. Due to seismic concerns, prior to the 1960s no building in Los Angeles was permitted to be taller than City Hall; therefore, from its completion in 1928 to 1964, it was the tallest building in Los Angeles. The building's distinctive top portion was based on the Mausoleum of Maussollos.

The concrete in its tower was made with sand from each of California's 58 counties and water from its 21 historical missions.

[FWillustrator]

The concrete in its tower was made with sand from each of California's 58 counties and water from its 21 historical missions.

And thirteen immigrant day laborers are buried in its foundation...just kidding

[vjackson]

[The art deco police building in L.A. you are talking about actually is the City Hall. It has played the police dept. in many TV shows and movies. The police building is a rectangular glass building from the late 60's. It was seen on Dragnet. The police dept. may have been in the city hall at one time but not at least for 50 years.

Thanks for the correction KP, I meant city hall. (I also meant to correct my post and accidently deleted it.)
The L.A. City Hall is even more impressive in person. It's cool that you know so much about it. (Did you ever take the tour?) It's undoubtedly one of my favorite Art Deco structures.

[JKC]

I am personally very dubious on the notion that moving City Hall down to Lancaster will be a catalyst for development in that area. As I look around City Hall now, it does not appear to to have had that effect in its current location nor has it in the last few cities I've worked in. That's not to say that it wouldn't bring some traffic to the area.

It sort of bugs me a little to know that the City Hall will be on the bottom of any map of the downtown. Maybe I'm being a little too brochure-minded.

[gdvanc]

I don't think City Hall will pull much development and commerce. For one thing, the traffic is too 9-5. For another thing, visitors to city offices generally take care of business and leave. That sort of hit-and-run pattern doesn't drive business that spills over. Too much of that type of thing (I think dry cleaners, real estate offices, and certain types of professional firms are given as examples) have killed otherwise prime locations.

I do like the idea of more activity in the P.O. and the possibility of its restoration. However, I'm not excited about the associated possibility of city offices moving into the T&P Warehouse. I think the best thing for that end of town would be for it to eventually be used in a way that keeps it active well past 5 o'clock, that takes advantage of its location on what could someday be a vital thoroughfare, and that keeps it on the tax rolls. With city offices there, it could be a big imposing dark spot in the evenings.

Having City Hall close to a public transport node would be good, but I'd say closer to a bus or intermodal station would be better than by the T&P depot.

Overall, I'd still like to see them build something new. Take a look around (the world) for examples of what other cities have done to create a space that brings the community together in some way - something beyond merely offices. Get some PR by making it green. Just do something special. Not to sound all "We Are the World" or anything. There's opportunity here. Or maybe I'm just sleepy.

Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year if I don't talk to you before then.

And welcome to all the new members.

[JBB]

I've always liked safly's (I think?) idea of putting a new city hall on the site of the convention center arena. I know that space is already spoken for, but it's nice to dream. It's already city-owned land, has quick access to the ITC, and would make a nice Main St. bookend with the courthouse.

[Dallastar]

Having City Hall close to a public transport node would be good, but I'd say closer to a bus or intermodal station would be better than by the T&P depot.

Overall, I'd still like to see them build something new. Take a look around (the world) for examples of what other cities have done to create a space that brings the community together in some way - something beyond merely offices. Get some PR by making it green. Just do something special. Not to sound all "We Are the World" or anything. There's opportunity here. Or maybe I'm just sleepy.

Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year if I don't talk to you before then.

And welcome to all the new members.

I think you're on to something "ghvanc", I like the way you think.

[Now in Denton]

I don't like the last two City Hall buildings . I know the old one (Were you now pay traffic tickets) Is Art Deco. And I love Art Deco. I never like that building. The yet even older one before that. Fort Worth City Hall looked like like Old Red in Dallas.

Im just happy beyond words to think Our City Hall could move to that awsome building!

[cberen1]

Someone above made the comment that City Hall would not drive traffic to the area. I think that's true, but I'm not sure what you could put into that building that would drive traffic. I think retail is out of the question, as are most office, medical, educational, or commercial uses.

Maybe a museum?

[Fort Worthology]

It makes a good Post Office (the one in the Federal Building stinks - I much prefer going to the Lancaster one). Clean it up and leave it a Post Office, says I. It seems a bit...dumb to move City Hall to the Post Office, unless they can do it without affecting the Post Office functions.

As for City Hall, I'd also like to see something new built.

[JBB]

I think the problem with leaving it as a post office is that the postal service has stopped using a good portion of the building and moved functions into other facilities.

[Fort Worthology]

I think the problem with leaving it as a post office is that the postal service has stopped using a good portion of the building and moved functions into other facilities.

So, why does that prevent the Post Office from maintaining a branch there? They don't have to use the whole thing. All I'm saying is that the branch there is far and away the best post office in downtown, and it would stink to lose it to a bunch of city office space. The PO branch in the Federal Building is awful - bad hours, slow service, and the requirement to pass through security to get to it. Even if City Hall wants to move some functions to the Post Office, they should keep the PO branch there up and running.

Besides, I personally would hate to lose my PO box there. And if it became all City Hall, I'd never go there, whereas I go to the Post Office there nearly every day. I like having a reason to go inside that gorgeous building.

[cberen1]

All I'm saying is that the branch there is far and away the best post office in downtown, and it would stink to lose it to a bunch of city office space. The PO branch in the Federal Building is awful - bad hours, slow service, and the requirement to pass through security to get to it. Even if City Hall wants to move some functions to the Post Office, they should keep the PO branch there up and running.

I couldn't agree more. It needs to keep it's current branch functions. But most of that building is wasted. They do virtually all mail sorting for the area up at the facility on Mark IV Pkwy.

By the way, does anyone know why it's called that? Where does Mark IV come from? Maybe it's a dumb question.

[JBB]

So, why does that prevent the Post Office from maintaining a branch there?

From the article that vjackson posted:

The U.S. Postal Service likely would continue to operate the branch if the city took over the building as a new city hall.

[Urbndwlr]

A new, signature building should be constructed on the site of the current convention center arena.
Now selecting the architect would be the next issue. With due respect to C&B, I'd want to open this to a national search for a rock star design architect. It needn't be as "look at me" as Austin's city hall, which, IMO, belongs in a desert rather than in a downtown setting, however it shouldn't pretend to be an 1920's strucutre either.

Maybe someone such as Robert AM Stern - conservative, timeless, but not a pure revivalist.

[Now in Denton]

A new, signature building should be constructed on the site of the current convention center arena.
Now selecting the architect would be the next issue. With due respect to C&B, I'd want to open this to a national search for a rock star design architect. It needn't be as "look at me" as Austin's city hall, which, IMO, belongs in a desert rather than in a downtown setting, however it shouldn't pretend to be an 1920's strucutre either.

Maybe someone such as Robert AM Stern - conservative, timeless, but not a pure revivalist.

For the life of me I never understood why so many in this forum are so blase about the Arena? Yes remodel ortear down and make it bigger but to just get rid of it? What convention center in a major city don't have a arena in thier convention center? Are you saying we just don't need one?

[JBB]

I've been to Atlanta and Orlando and neither of them have an arena. And those are two of the largest in the US. Sure, the Georgia Dome and Phillips Arena are in the same neighborhood as the GWCC, but it does not have an attached arena.

The city is already planning to demolish the arena when the new arena in the CD opens. It certainly seems reasonable to do that since I'm guessing that very little arena business is connected directly to business in the Convention Center.

[gdvanc]

Apparently there was a town hall meeting Monday (01/08) on the city's facility needs. Were any of the gifted (or re-gifted) intellects from this forum able to attend?

On the announcement on their web page, they ask citizens to provide answers to a couple of questions:

1. What types of services to the community and businesses would you like to see the City of Fort Worth provide from buildings at several locations around the city?
2. What are the most important goals the City should seek to achieve in a new City Hall building (for example: community gathering place, "signature" architecture, customer friendliness, contribution to the economic vitality of an area of the City, etc…)?

I haven't lived in Fort Worth in some 40 years so I can only play the home version. That's unfortunate, because I obviously have great answers.


Urb has suggested above (as he did in aught-4 in another thread on this topic into which I should perhaps merge this one but I'm in a bit of a hurry) that the convention center arena would be a good place. I'm starting to warm up to that. There are some benefits: it seems like a pretty good chunk of land, so there are a lot of options for size of the building and land use and such (include a small plaza?); the city already owns it (so they won't have to [1] buy it and [2] remove it from the tax rolls); if they go a little tall, they block the view of SBC from some views from the east (which should raise property values somewhere); it's close to public transportation. Others?

Cons? Hmm. It limits convention center expanson. It may be hard to come up with a good design that works well with the convention center's facade. Maybe that's not such a big deal. There could be timing problems between the arena project and the city hall project. If they build something ugly, it's a very visible ugly - although arguably no worse than what's there (I kind of like the saucer that's there now, but I recognize that's probably more sentimentality than taste; my first-ever concert was there - Johnny Cash with June Carter and family; my last date with my high school sweetheart was there - after she broke up with me - I had bought her tickets to Barry Manilow [her choice, not mine!] for Christmas before the breakup - nothing better than sitting through a "Can't Smile Without You" Barry Manilow concert with the girl who just kicked you to the curb - but, hey, I'm not bitter or anything).

Now I've completely lost my train of thought.

Well, we could leave the saucer and build a couple of towers around it.

Happy New Year! And good luck on the city hall of the future.

[safly]

I say tear down the FWCC Dome and build UP a 5 story glass enclosed office building. Beautiful atrium work, and lots of "GREEN" construction, ,make it SMART. Then use the old dome metal and build those into the building design or cap the glass building with them, but in an "open up" arrangement on top of the hall or building. Give it a VERY MODERN and edgy look to a new FWCHall. Like a metallic "Venus Flytrap" designed cap opening upwards to the sky. How symbolic.

Plus I am sure the metal already in place will help offset SKYROCKETING construction material costs.

[Now in Denton]

I do like the idea to cap the other end on Main St. With another iconic building. But lets get real. Where will the delagets meet? When either party comes into town? At the new Arena by Will Roders? If it gets built.

You need an arena. Not just any big room will do. Im willing to have a new Convention Center Arena on the eastern end of the convention center. But timing is everything in the convention business.

[JBB]

An arena at the Convention Center is not part of any long term plan by the city. I'm going straight off of memory, but the plans for the CC call for 1) an arena in the CD, 2) the current arena to be demolished and replaced with more meeting and exhibit space, and 3) the East side of the exhibit hall annex to be demolished so that Commerce can be straightened out. I'm also guessing they have a plan in place to accomadate conventions that would utilize arena space, which I'm guessing is very few. The ball is rolling on the new arena. It's just a matter of the funds falling into place.

[Urbndwlr]

I do like the idea to cap the other end on Main St. With another iconic building. But lets get real. Where will the delagets meet? When either party comes into town? At the new Arena by Will Roders? If it gets built.

You need an arena. Not just any big room will do. Im willing to have a new Convention Center Arena on the eastern end of the convention center. But timing is everything in the convention business.

Fine. Let's build another large convention space on the south end of Downtown.

[Now in Denton]

^^^
Your point is ?

[JBB]

I can't speak directly for Urbndwlr, but I think the point he is trying to make is that there is plenty of space on the southern end of downtown to expand the CC, not just the space where the arena sits.

[vjackson]

Most of council likes old post office option
By MIKE LEE
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

FORT WORTH -- A majority of the City Council is leaning toward moving City Hall to the historic downtown post office, a proposal that would be significantly cheaper than building a new City Hall.

The $136 million proposal calls for moving city government to the post office on Lancaster Boulevard, keeping the existing City Hall building for additional office space, renovating a nearby building for more space and building a parking garage.

An informal poll of council members during Thursday's meeting indicated that most support the post office proposal, although some question whether a new City Hall is needed.

Consultants hired by the city to evaluate options for finding new municipal office space found that building a new City Hall would cost more than $200 million. The cost of other options -- leasing more space or buying additional buildings -- would range from $124 million to $128 million.

The consultants, Carter & Burgess and The Staubach Co., concluded that the post office was a viable option.

"If we can be this close in dollars and have a chance to really make that building come alive," it may be worth it, Councilman Danny Scarth said.

The post office has several advantages. The classical limestone building with its Greek columns is on the National Register of Historic Places and dominates the south end of downtown along Lancaster Avenue, where the city is trying to encourage development. If the city moves in, it would create a bookend to the historic Tarrant County Courthouse at the north end of downtown, supporters say.

The post office is also next door to the Trinity Railway Express' Texas & Pacific Station, a hub for the growing commuter-rail system.

"This will ... provide opportunity for public transit to be used in a way it's never been used before," Mayor Mike Moncrief said. "This window will only be open one time."

In addition to Moncrief and Scarth, council members Wendy Davis and Jungus Jordan also indicated that they favor the post office option. Councilman Carter Burdette said that the post office appeared to be the best option but expressed reservations.

"The first question is, do we need it?" Burdette said.

Mayor Pro Tem Kathleen Hicks said she's no fan of the current City Hall, but is concerned about the cost.

Councilmen Chuck Silcox and Sal Espino said the city should concentrate on basic services.

"I have not had [many] phone calls about a new City Hall," Espino said. "I'm getting lots of calls about streets, roads, parks and community centers."

Silcox questioned whether the numbers had been tailored to make the post office the best option. City officials didn't release the actual purchase and construction costs for the post office, citing the sensitivity of the negotiations with the U.S. Postal Service. The report only included summaries of what each option would cost over 30 years, including interest and other factors.

"We need to address the problems that the citizens want before we address something like this," Silcox said.

City Hall options

Consultants estimate that Fort Worth will have about 1,600 employees working in City Hall by 2017, up from about 1,300, and will need 430,000 square feet of office space and 1,500 parking spots. Fort Worth owns about 253,000 square feet of office space in several buildings and leases about 60,000 square feet. Several options are being considered; total costs listed include interest and lease payments over a given period.

Lease new space

Keep the same buildings, 253,000 square feet

Lease up to 175,000 square feet of extra space

Cost: $124 million over 30 years

Expansion/construction

Keep existing buildings, 253,000 square feet

Add to the existing City Hall by enclosing the outdoor walkways, 13,500 square feet

Buy Tarrant County College's May Owen building at Houston Street and Lancaster Avenue, 37,900 square feet

Build a two-story annex just south of City Hall, 34,000 square feet

Lease 90,000 square feet

Cost: $128 million over 30 years

Post office move

Buy and renovate Lancaster Avenue post office, 143,100 square feet

Buy and renovate the commissary building that connects the post office with the former Texas & Pacific terminal, 23,900 square feet

Keep existing buildings, 253,000 square feet

Enclose walkways at City Hall, 13,500 square feet

Build parking garage

Cost: $136 million over 30 years

New City Hall

Build a six-story, 430,000-square-foot office on the site of the Police and Fire Academy near Henderson Street and White Settlement Road

Build a parking garage on the same site

Sell existing city buildings

Cost: $212 million over 30 years

Not an option

City officials have talked for years about filling in the two-story atrium at the existing City Hall, which would add about 24,500 square feet. However, the consultants concluded that the cost would be prohibitive. Because the return vents for the building's air-conditioning system are on the ground floor of the atrium, filling the atrium would require redesigning the A/C system. That, in turn, would require the city to bring the building up to modern building codes, including adding sprinklers.

Cost: $48 million to $55 million

SOURCE: Study by Carter & Burgess and The Staubach Co.

[JBB]

I was a little surprised that there is so little different in cost of each option (other than building new). That makes the Post Office move not look a lot better. I'm not crazy about the proposed location of a new city hall. I realize that's going to be right on the Trinity Uptown development on property that they already own, but it just sorta screams "eh". I'd rather see it closer to Main.

[Fort Worthology]

Still think the Post Office plan is a mistake, but looks like everybody's mind has been made up. Ah well. Hopefully the plan to keep the PO branch there is still part of the plan.

Interesting that they mentioned the little loading dock that connects the PO and the T&P. I'd always thought that would have made a cool little retail project - not now, of course, but in the future when there's more activity down there. Oh well.

[vjackson]

I wonder if they will divide city services between the post office location and the old building. That's a recipe for confusion.

[JBB]

Everything I've read has indicated that keeping the PO branch is part of the plan.

[Willy1]

Ch 8 news had a teaser tonight about FW City Hall moving to the Post Office building... and they said it would cost &125 or 150 Million (can't remember which)! That was a pretty shocking price tag! For that price seems like they could build something brand new - and really impressive!!!!!! But, I like the idea of that building being the new City Hall, because City Hall should be grand and impressive - something to leave a lasting impression for visitors to the city. The current CH is horrible! I can't wait for Lancaster to be built out and for the Water Gardens to be finished. I think the Southern end of DTFW needs to be even more impressive than the Northern end of DT because it is the first impression - and many times the only impression - of FW people have as they drive through DT on I30... I hope that end of DT turns out nice once Lancaster, the new Omni, and the Water Gardens are complete. There are so many eye sores in that part of town right now!

[John T Roberts]

All of the information provided by the consultants is very good. As you can see, the Post Office building is not large enough to handle the city's needs alone. The existing City Hall would have to remain under the Post Office Plan. The costs of any option are all fairly equal, except for construction of a new building. I will admit that the Council does seem partial to using the Post Office for city facilities. I think using the Post Office for City Council Chambers and Council offices would probably be the most appropriate use for the building. However, that would not only lead to confusion, but would separate the Council from city staff, who would remain at the existing building.

[gdvanc]

Bob Ray Sanders recommended that the city take a look around at what other cities in Tarrant County have done with new city halls in today's column. Well, I guess it's yesterday's column now.

Fort Worth can find a model city hall in the suburbs

Apparently there was a town hall meeting Monday (01/08) on the city's facility needs. Were any of the gifted (or re-gifted) intellects from this forum able to attend?

On the announcement on their web page, they ask citizens to provide answers to a couple of questions:

1. What types of services to the community and businesses would you like to see the City of Fort Worth provide from buildings at several locations around the city?
2. What are the most important goals the City should seek to achieve in a new City Hall building (for example: community gathering place, "signature" architecture, customer friendliness, contribution to the economic vitality of an area of the City, etc…)?

I haven't lived in Fort Worth in some 40 years so I can only play the home version. That's unfortunate, because I obviously have great answers.

I guess I'll throw out a couple of tired-headed answers anyway.

1. a) Pick up and drop off any city form or drop off payments for city bills at any library, community center, city annex, or [water] customer service office.

1. b) Consider televising city council and board meetings at libraries or community centers. When you're ready to really throw down some techno, let people participate from these remote locations.

1. c) Council/board meetings on demand at the libraries (on DVD or a streaming video server [MooTube? have to throw a Cowtown ref in here somewhere]).

1. d) Seminars on doing business with/in the city, on organizing community groups, on getting involved (boards/commissions), etc. at the libraries/community ceners. This could encourage involvement as much as it informs.


2. a) Primary goals should be to build a great "user interface" - the customer-facing aspect where people come to do business with the city (layout/flow, signage/info, technology, appearance); to build a great working environment - (environment doesn't frustrate productiviy, does promote cooperation within and between departments/groups [having multiple buildings can hurt this a lot], is comfortable, etc.); to build a facility that connects with the public and makes people want to get involved at some level (public plaza, 'civic' library/resources, meeting/training areas w/ regular programs/classes for students/citizens/groups, ...); to build with growth and change (technological and other) in mind; to build with transit in mind - preferably within inclement-weather-walking-distance to rail to show we're serious about that sort of thing (and when they get off the train, they should see a grand entrance and not feel like they're walking in the back door);

2. b) At least compare the net adjusted cost of a showplace/signature facility to a more utilitarian one and consider whether the extra annual cost might be justified.

2. c) Ditto with a green facility. In fact, that might arguably belong in 2. a).

2. d) I doubt that city halls typically contribute much to the economic vitality of an area; most customers get in and out as quickly as possible; few employees get out of the building and lounge around at neighboring cafes at lunch or after work (although if I had to work in the current city hall I'd be tempted to hit the bars by my first smoke break - and I don't smoke). An exception might be if you really hit the "community gathering place" out of the park and build something that keeps people in the area.



Some math follows. Don't let your eyes glaze over. And someone check my math. I'm wicked sleepy right now and may really blow this. It'll be fun just the same.


Since my preference is for a new City Hall, let me pencil whip that and see what anyone thinks.

From one of vjackson's posts:

Lease new space -..........$124 mil. / 30 years .. $4.13 mil. / year
Expansion/construction -...$128 mil. / 30 years .. $4.27 mil. / year
Post office move -.........$136 mil. / 30 years .. $4.53 mil. / year
New City Hall -............$212 mil. / 30 years .. $7.07 mil. / year


They don't make it clear whether the values they give are total (unadjusted) payout or NPV. That obviously makes a difference.

If these are not adjusted (that is, they are not NPV), then my assumption of the estimated costs being spread out evenly over the 30 year period could be misleading. The difference could be fairly important. $4.27 million per year for 30 years is not the same as $64 million the first year and $2.21 million per year for the next 29, which is not the same as $2.21 million per year for the first 29 years and $64 million in the final year.

Anyway, it's the best I have since they don't specify.

Also let me assume that the city *must* obtain additional space and that the $124 million is the minimum the city can reasonably spend to meet their future facility needs.

The premium over the minimum cost for a new city hall is then $212 million - $124 million = $88 million. Over 30 years, that's $2.93 million per year.

Is that too much? Depends on your point of view. At least compare it with the city's typical revenues and expenditures. For that, I'll use the city's 2004 CAFR.

In 2004 the city reported total revenues a bit over $498 million (so you might argue that the city would be paying less than six months' salary for its new house - although people against a new city hall probably won't buy that analogy).

Compare the $2.93 million annual premium (or $7.07 million total annual payment) for a new city hall with the $14 million spent in 2004 for the libraries; the $29 million spent for parks and community services; or the $15 million spent on public events and facilities.

From that perspective, the cost of a new city hall doesn't seem enormously extravagant to me.

On the other hand, the city operated in the red in 2004 by about $16.3 million. Not sure if that was very atypical or how they've been doing since (I understand they're having a bit of a problem counting up all their beans), but people could certainly argue that even if the additional cost is only a couple million per year that's too much to add to a budget that's already underwater.

I wonder if they will divide city services between the post office location and the old building. That's a recipe for confusion.

Yeah, if you have to go to one building for some things but another building for other things, that would be bad. Also, if you have one building that seems to be the obvious "City Hall" but the people with whom you need to conduct business are in another building (whether it's across the street or six blocks away), that would be bad.

I think if the building says "City Hall", you should be able to conduct pretty much any city business there.

[Sam Stone]

What's the breakdown of sq footage the city needs vs. sq footage of post office + T&P warehouse?

I'm starting to think that might be a good idea. The argument against including the T&P is that it woud be better as a private use, but look how long it's gone without being developed. I think the building itself has a lot of impediments to being developed, so why not make it public. I don't buy this argument about there not being enough parking. Of course there isn't--so build some. Build a large modern parking structure that's big enough for city employees, people doing business at city hall, and people coming down on evenings and weekends to enjoy the entertainment that will eventually be Lancaster.

You want to make city hall more customer friendly? The T&P could have a great groundfloor presence. Imagine all those roll-up doors repaced with big storefront windows.

I find the lease option questionable. Property taxes get passed on through rents. The city would end up indirectly paying property taxes to itself, the county, the school district, etc. Doesn't seem like a wise use of money.

[Fort Worthology]

I believe there is already a plan of sorts for the redevelopment of the warehouse into residences. I'd rather see that than it be taken over by the city.

[safly]

d) I doubt that city halls typically contribute much to the economic vitality of an area; most customers get in and out as quickly as possible; few employees get out of the building and lounge around at neighboring cafes at lunch or after work...

And I can attest to that. In confidence of course.

[David Love]

Cowtown's Center
By BOB RAY SANDERS
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

As Fort Worth leaders contemplate whether to relocate City Hall, I wonder if they can be as visionary and bold as officials in some of the smaller cities around Tarrant County.

You may recall that five months ago I spent a couple of weeks touring city halls in suburban towns, declaring Grapevine's the best in the county and taking special note of town halls in Southlake, Keller, Hurst and Mansfield.

The advantage that many of the smaller cities had over Fort Worth was that they were able to plan, design and build new town squares from the ground up, creating a unique "downtown" dynamic.

A new municipal building in Fort Worth, to replace the aging and inadequate City Hall that opened in 1971, could create a synergy of its own while making a statement that will last far into the future.

The city is looking at four options to accommodate City Council chambers and other municipal offices, said facilities manager Glenn Balog:

Remain in the current structure and continue to lease space around town, which would cost $124 million over 30 years, when debt service, utilities and other operational expenses are included.

Build an annex to the existing building and purchase the nearby May Owen building from Tarrant County College, costing about $128 million.

Purchase and renovate the historic and majestic U.S. Post Office on East Lancaster Avenue at a cost of $136 million.

Build a new structure on a new campus, which would have a price tag of $212.5 million.

Mayor Mike Moncrief has shown interest in the post office option, but by no means has he mandated staff to treat it as if it were the final choice, Balog said.

He noted that a structural analysis has been completed on the post office site, and he is "about to wrap up due diligence" on the facility. His findings probably will be presented to the council next month.

Part of the due diligence work was to determine the footprint of the property, he said, noting that there is "some ambiguity of property lines between the post office and the T&P Building."

Balog said he just found out this week that someone recently conducted an appraisal on the building, and it wasn't the city. Perhaps another party is interested in buying it.

Regardless of whether the city buys the post office, someone will see the development opportunities in it, especially with the make-over of East Lancaster and with new projects being considered on the south end of town.

Of course, cost will be a major consideration in what the city decides to do, and there isn't much difference among the first three City Hall options. That makes the post office proposal sound good compared with the status quo.

However, while originally intrigued with relocating City Hall in a restored historic building, I really do think Fort Worth needs a brand-new building that somehow will embrace its past while also speaking to its future.

Several weeks ago I sat with a group of local architects who were very excited about the possibility of a different location for City Hall, whether in a restored building or in a new one. But they were concerned that there had not been enough discussion about some of the things they see as important.

They spoke of "purpose," but they also were quick to throw out words like "vision, the dream and identity."

Architect Joe Self asked, "What should a City Hall mean?" He added, "The process is as important as the final thing that happens."

The architects, all members of the Fort Worth chapter of the American Institute of Architects, suggested that the City Council might want to set up a competitive process in which architects study the problem and offer solutions with their designs.

Although they acknowledged that such a competition could be an international one, they were confident that "there is enough talent in Tarrant County that you could get some amazing solutions."

That sounds like a good idea to me.

I know the city has asked for public input concerning its four options for a City Hall, but before we get too far into the process, it might be good to have a series of focus groups and maybe a couple of town hall meetings to really talk about the vision thing.

If City Hall were relocated, what area of downtown would be most suitable -- south, north, the center or someplace else? If a new structure were built, should be it modern architecture, have a historical flavor or some combination of both?

I don't have all the answers, but I have faith that Fort Worth residents can come together and offer direction on one of the most important decisions facing our city's leaders.

And I have confidence that those leaders will listen.

[vjackson]

Relocate City Hall into Radioshack's vacant building. The city already paid for it.

[David Love]

The options are a bit more complex than I originally thought, it's tempting to just consider the over all costs but each option could have long term consequences that are not easily visible by just looking at the bottom line.

I know we've discussed the Post Office option on the forum somewhere but didn't see a "City Hall" specific thread.

[John T Roberts]

David, there was an existing thread, so I have merged the two.

[safly]

Wherever they decide to put it. I cannot wait to see LOBSTER again make a mockery of the City Council meetings.

I think RS idea is perfect.

[RD Milhollin]

Here is another article on the proposed reuse of the Lancaster Avenue Post Office as the new City Hall. I had not heard the phrase "stripping the building to it's skeleton" before, this would be pretty major work. I like the idea of the council chamber being housed in the classic building though. The accompanying photo shows the wall of brass PO boxes; if these were removed it would really lighten up the interior, and the boxes could be sold on eBay to help finance the renovation. The article refers to the idea of decentralizing some of the city offices, and this sounds great for some government functions, especially those that serve citizens directly, like water services and code inspection. But the bulk of city government probably doesn't lend itself to dispersal, and physically grouping departments that need to work closely together should lead to some efficiencies if not economies. The 500 car garage is also mentioned.

Posted on Sat, May. 23, 2009

Preserving a Piece of Fort Worth's Past is Part of New City Hall Debate
Post office has long been in decline, but city budget has little wiggle room

http://www.star-tele...ry/1392991.html

By MIKE LEEmikelee@star-telegram.com

FORT WORTH — Some of the windows on the north side of the old post office on Lancaster Avenue are cracked in places and covered with cardboard and fraying insulation in others.

The lobby is dimly lit, and it’s hard to see the details of the marble floor or the gold leaf in the ceiling.

On the second floor, though, the morning light pours through the eastern windows. The 76-year-old brass handrails gleam, and the light reflects off the original wood molding and the parquet floors.

This is what the fuss in Fort Worth is all about. Supporters say the post office is a masterpiece by a famous Fort Worth architect that needs to be preserved. Detractors worry that it will become a money pit if the city tries to acquire it.

Preservationists have been fighting to save Lancaster Avenue and the post office since the 1980s. For the last five years, the city and the Postal Service have been negotiating over using the building for a new City Hall despite cries that it’s too expensive.

The City Council agreed last week to spend $200,000 on a study of the idea. The debate is likely to be long.

Architecture

Wyatt Hedrick, who designed the post office, probably would have enjoyed the flap.

At one time, he was among the best-known architects in the country, and he enjoyed publicity. He married the daughter of Gov. Ross Sterling, had offices in Fort Worth, Dallas and Houston, and appeared in a magazine ad for Lord Calvert whiskey.

When Frank Lloyd Wright bad-mouthed Hedrick’s design for the Shamrock Hotel in Houston (which was featured in the movie Giant), Hedrick fired back, "What has Frank Lloyd Wright done in the last few years except bask in his own self-esteem?"

Hedrick designed a lot of Fort Worth’s best-known buildings, including the Will Rogers Memorial Center and Amon Carter Stadium at Texas Christian University.

Some of his best work is in a three-block stretch of Lancaster Avenue: The Texas & Pacific Terminal, which has been turned into condos; the post office; and the long-vacant Texas & Pacific Warehouse.

Ames Fender, an architect and Hedrick’s grandson, said the post office stands out. Unlike the railroad buildings, Hedrick used a neoclassical style, with Greek columns topped with calf heads, a nod to Fort Worth’s history as a cattle town.

"It really helps that building stand out as a more respectful presence there on the Lancaster," Fender said.

Preservation efforts

All of Lancaster Avenue was obscured when the Texas Department of Transportation built the I-30 overpass along Lancaster in the early 1960s. In the 1970s, a group of business leaders and environmentalists organized to fight the overpass, and it was removed in 2001.

The city has since spent millions to widen and beautify Lancaster Avenue, including adding lighted sculptures.

The post office, though, has been in gentle decline since the 1980s, when the Postal Service moved most of its sorting operations to a new building on Mark IV Parkway.

Today, the Postal Service uses the lobby and most of the first floor for mail operations. The basement is full of scales, drop boxes and other equipment.

The sorting rooms on the second and third floors are largely empty. The old offices on the second floor are decorated similarly to the lobby, with marble running up the walls and nice details such as transom windows above the doors and movable panels separating some of the offices. The third floor is largely empty except for a shooting range, where postal inspectors used to qualify with their handguns.

City officials have been discussing the post office since 2004. The current City Hall is cramped, and the city has to lease office space around Fort Worth. The post office is a natural fit, supporters say, and using it for city offices could attract restaurants and other businesses to Lancaster Avenue.

"It would be a key to bringing street life there to Lancaster," Fender said.

Mayor Mike Moncrief is enthusiastic about the idea.

Fort Worth residents "take a lot of pride in protecting and preserving our past," he said. "This would provide us an opportunity to do both."

Finances

The city did a formal study in 2006 to determine whether the post office would be a viable City Hall.

The study estimated that Fort Worth will need about 425,000 square feet of office space as local government continues to grow. Remodeling the post office would cost an estimated $136 million over 30 years, compared with $124 million if the city kept its existing building and kept leasing space. Building a new City Hall from scratch ranked as the most expensive option, at $212 million.

But there were catches, and it was hard to make a solid comparison of the numbers. The post office would provide only about 180,000 square feet of office space, so the city would have to keep the existing City Hall or keep leasing space. The new-construction option assumed that the city would build everything it needed: 430,000 square feet.

City Council members liked the idea of using the post office but took no action, partly because of tight finances.

Then-Councilman Chuck Silcox thought the numbers had been slanted to favor the post office. Other council members said the city should move away from a centralized City Hall and open satellite offices to serve far-flung areas.

Latest proposal

Since 2006, the Postal Service has paid a developer to market the old building. Concho Development is a partnership formed by local developer Pat Cornell and David Godfrey. Cornell helped develop the Railhead Industrial Park with Ed Bass. Godfrey previously worked for the General Services Administration and now develops government buildings nationwide.

Under Concho’s proposal, the developer would buy the building, renovate it to the city’s specifications and lease it to the city for 20 to 30 years for an annual cost of $4.1 million to $6.4 million. At the end of the term, the city would own the building.

Unlike in 2006, when the city wanted to buy the building outright, Concho would act as a middleman in the lease-purchase. Cornell said the company would receive a standard development fee but wouldn’t say how much.

The debate

Others in the real estate business have questioned whether the city can afford the deal and why no one else was allowed to submit proposals.

The cost — $300 per square foot — is higher than standard commercial buildings. Also, renovating old buildings is a notoriously uncertain business. If the building is found to have asbestos or other environmental problems, the cost could skyrocket. A Postal Service spokesman said last week that "the planning process that has just been approved will identify all the issues with the building and their costs; that is part of the process."

Cornell said it’s premature to knock the idea until the study is complete. The proposal includes a 500-space parking garage and a large meeting room for the City Council, which aren’t included in most commercial projects. He said that the building has some asbestos but that any environmental or structural problems can be eliminated by stripping the building to its skeleton.

"If it works, it’s going to be as shiny a new building as anything in the city of Fort Worth — brand new with the historic overlay," he said.

But, if anything, the city has less money than in 2006. The recession has cut into property and sales taxes, and the city eliminated more than 100 positions this year.

More staff cuts are possible over the next couple of fiscal years.

"My approach is going to be to take no action until we’re told by our staff that this is either doable or not doable," Moncrief said. "Until they tell me it’s not doable, then I’m going to believe it is."

MIKE LEE, 817-390-7539

[John T Roberts]

I am concerned about the phrase "strippng the building to its skeleton" and what that could mean. Does that mean the beautiful and equally historic lobby is in danger? I would hope not. I think any conversion to a City Hall function should take into consideration possible interior historic preservation, as well as exterior preservation. Granted, some of the spaces inside of the building don't need to be preserved, but some parts of the interior should be considered sacred. We have too much of a throw away mentality these days.

[Dismuke]

I would suggest that the lobby is as significant as the building itself - if not more so. There are a number of examples where historic buildings with botched up or entirely destroyed facades have been recreated. But how many instances can one think of where a marble lobby has been completely destroyed and subsequently recreated? I cannot think of an example. And my guess is the reason is primarily a matter of cost. Can you imagine what it would cost to recreate the Fort Worth post office lobby?

And next time you happen to be in the lobby, stop and think for a moment that there was once a time when such splendor and grandeur was once considered appropriate for something as mundane as a post office, a venue patronized by the widest possible social common denominator. Today, even the most prestigious, highbrow and upscale establishments look cheap and utilitarian by comparison unless they are fortunate enough to be housed in a vintage pre-World War II building.

Grand, ornate vintage lobbies are FAR more rare than are vintage buildings in general as a lot of them were gutted and destroyed in the 1950s and 1960s in the name of "modernization." To destroy the post office lobby would be beyond disgusting.