56 replies to this topic

[John T Roberts]

This question is not what you would wish for, but what you honestly think will be the first thing put in place of the Landmark Tower. This replacement may last a few years, or it may be more permanent and stay in place more than 20 years. You also may vote for more than one choice.

[mosteijn]

Of course, it depends on how short-term we're talking. I can't imagine XTO not needing more parking if they're going to keep growing, so I think either a lot or a garage will replace Landmark (leaning towards lot, it's much easier to replace than a garage). Maybe a park if some downtowners pull the right strings, but why would XTO spend all that money buying the building and demolishing it if it was just going to turn it over to the public?

[John T Roberts]

I would say that short term might be for up to 5 years. If the element lasts between 5 and 10 years, I would say that is a mid-term use.

[JBB]

I know it’s a bit callous, but I don’t see a large corporation doing something for nothing.

You mean something like restoring the original facade on the base of a historic building that they own?

For the record, I think this lot will end up as surface parking, but I think XTO has shown that they're not opposed to doing things that are out of the norm for large corporations. I doubt they'll receive any quick financial windfall from the Simpson Building, unless they sell it, of course.

[redhead]

They have legal obligations to their shareholders.. they need to be self-serving.

[John T Roberts]

Redhead has a point. The money for the restoration of the exterior of the Baker Building was probably well spent. XTO didn't have any space available for meetings and conferences. The old bank lobby at the Baker was a perfect fit for this use. Granted, they could have just put in a new interior, but the restored base has a much better corporate image than the 1960's version. Later on, if they sell the property, I'm sure that the restored building will fetch a much higher price than the botched base version. I also know that several of the executives at XTO are partial to the older buildings and have an eye for preservation. From what I have been told, they really wanted to restore or at the least, renovate the Landmark Tower, but it had so many problems that even they could not justify the costs.

[Urbndwlr]

The Baker Bld rennovation looks fantastic. I am concerned that a new, ground-up project designed by Carter & Burgess would not be as well executed as the restorations XTO has performed. Unless C&B has some hidden design talent in its ranks, I sincerely hope that XTO brings in a talented design architect if it decides to develop anything on the Landmark Twr block.

[DrkLts]

For those that hadn't voted yet, I gonna let the cat out of the bag. The vast majority voted for the realistic outcome...a surface parking lot. Like thats a big suprise, FW's snail pace of developing makes that the popular choice for this poll. Like a nice park or building is gonna break ground asap. Hahahaha!

[safly]

I guess I'll go hug a tree today.




Not like we need oxygen in our CBD areas. Do we?

[DrkLts]

I'll hug a tree as soon as they start hugging back
I see some peeps want "greenspace" in downtown. Just when everyone is upset that the Montgomery Plaza is too "suburban", the same ones think a public park will end up smack dab in the middle of downtown. Trees and green grass is suburban as you can get.

[safly]

I'll hug a tree as soon as they start hugging back
I see some peeps want "greenspace" in downtown. Just when everyone is upset that the Montgomery Plaza is too "suburban", the same ones think a public park will end up smack dab in the middle of downtown. Trees and green grass is suburban as you can get.

The OVERABUNDANTLY EXPECTED retail tenancy is TOO SUBURBAN, but the project is alright. Why does it seem like the same "big box" retail stores follow the lead of Target just about EVERYWHERE ELSE? The MW project really did not need all of that supposed "suburban" landscape feel. I mean it's only a hop and a skip (which is how I roll) away from THA RIVER. The Trinity has so much landscape I don't think that a nearby "green belt" landscape project surrounding it is necessary. As for DTFW, we do need more trees, who hug me back with that good ol O2 and plenty o summer sun shade. It is what's needed in DTFW, ESPECIALLY if they are gonna implode something HUGE. It's a slap in the face to just have some surface parking lot. IMHO!

[Shocker]

Yes we need a park so those dear sweet grackles will have some place to hang out and use as a toilet. I won't be sitting in that park.

[Urbndwlr]

It would be GREAT to have a full block urban park Downtown. Imagine if the City bought the land from XTO, and XTO built a mixed-use building on the 3/4 of a block which is currently surface parking around the WT Waggonner building (immediately across the street to the south). The improved value to the surrounding property would help justify the opportunity cost for XTO.

The City should then built 2-3 floors of underground parking (depending on how expensive it is to excavate) under the park. See SF's Union Square as an example of this. Yes, expensive, but could be another city-defining asset and real urban jewel in the south/central part of Downtown.

[cberen1]

There is some new contractor operating on the site today. I'm not sure what they're doing, but they've got boring equipment with them. It doesn't look like demolition work to me.

[hooked]

I noticed recently that people have been bringing junk metal (file cabinets and such) to the site, I suppose to be recycled. It's being hauled away daily.

[Fort Worthology]

I'm curious - at what point do y'all think we'll hear some actual news about the Landmark site? It doesn't appear that there's all that much left to do to the big hole.

It certainly is a nice big hole, though. Surely, having said big hole there would be a great benefit to any plans to, oh, I don't know, put one/several new buildings there?

[Stadtplan]

I'm curious - at what point do y'all think we'll hear some actual news about the Landmark site? It doesn't appear that there's all that much left to do to the big hole.

It certainly is a nice big hole, though. Surely, having said big hole there would be a great benefit to any plans to, oh, I don't know, put one/several new buildings there?

I’d be curious to learn more about the advantages of leaving it as an excavated hole vs. backfilling it for a temporary surface-level parking lot. If they plan to build anytime soon, perhaps they should leave the hole since they will need to re-excavate the parking lot for a building.

[AndyN]

Liability for one thing.

[David Love]

How about a pool or a cement pond?

[renamerusk]

An subterranean open air plaza with below grade level restaurants and boutique shops.

With the Landmark Tower now gone; already it really is an eye openly beautiful open spaced which is presently surrounded on three sides by grand buildings. XTO has the opportunity to some day erect a significant tower upon the Waggoner Block; and if that block is inadequate, perhaps arch over 7th Street and incorporate the plaza into the main entrance of a new tower.


Keep Fort Worth folksy!

[cjyoung]

I'll hug a tree as soon as they start hugging back
I see some peeps want "greenspace" in downtown. Just when everyone is upset that the Montgomery Plaza is too "suburban", the same ones think a public park will end up smack dab in the middle of downtown. Trees and green grass is suburban as you can get.

There are plenty of trees and green grass in Central Park.

[John T Roberts]

I found out why the boring equipment has been placed on the site. They are taking borings to do soil testing. This needs to be done before any new construction is done on the site. Soil testing will tell the architects and engineers what type of building and structural system can be put on the site when a new building is constructed there. The soil test will tell them how deep the piers must be drilled to support a new structure on the site. If they only build a surface parking lot there, then the information in the test will tell them the best type of paving to use and how thick it should be placed. It will also tell them what type of fill material suitable for a parking lot can be used for the two story hole where the Landmark's basements used to be.

At the current time, no decision has been made for the site.

[DrkLts]

I'll hug a tree as soon as they start hugging back
I see some peeps want "greenspace" in downtown. Just when everyone is upset that the Montgomery Plaza is too "suburban", the same ones think a public park will end up smack dab in the middle of downtown. Trees and green grass is suburban as you can get.

There are plenty of trees and green grass in Central Park.

Yeah, but they have Central Park to remind the inner city people of what "Greenspace" looks like with thier miles and miles of skyscrapers and concrete streets. Why does Fort Worth need greenspace in downtown when FW is surrounded by just that? lol
Look at these pics bburton posted on this forum from 2 diffent locations (hope ya don't mind bburton)

[RD Milhollin]

Fort Worth is fortunate to have large areas of green space on the fringes of the downtown area, particularly Trinity Park to the west and Gateway Park to the east. Trinity Park has probably reached its potential, is efforts have been made to encroach on the space for development infrastructure. Gateway is wide open and should be a focus of future residential development once the flooding issues there are fully resolved.

The Trinity Uptown project should provide some open spaces along the canals and a few other spaces, but from what I have seen no significant park space like Trinity and Gateway. In my opinion Southside is lacking in usable park space.

The point to be made for open spaces downtown is different, IMO, than for Trinity or Gateway Parks. The downtown parks are more "plazas" or "squares", and are singularly different than "suburban" parks (which are usually marginal lands that would be too costly for subdivision developers to grade into lots). The urban city plazas are places for people to get out of doors during lunch after having been cooped up all morning in a cubicle. It is a space for the display of public art, a place to watch people pass by, and setting for significant architecture to be appreciated. People meet there, eat there, do business there, just sit and think there. People who live downtown, a small but growing segment of the Fort Worth population, need open space. We don't need a Central Park, but New York did, even a hundred years ago when there was literally no "usable" open space for miles around. That space has enriched the life, and property values, of that city in appreciable ways.

Great cities of the works have public plazas that serve as focal points for their communities, London (Trafalgar), Mexico City (Zocalo), Beijing (Tiananmin), Antwerp (Grote Markit), Rome (Piazza Navona), Paris (Hotel de Ville), you get the picture.

Fort Worth needs public plazas. We have Burnet Park (Plaza?), General Worth Square, and are going to have a reconstituted Hyde Park in a few years. There should be some sort of push to have a real, actual, physical Sundance Square along Main Street in the northern part of downtown, preferrably with underground parking. Does the space formerly the site of the Landmark Tower need a public plaza. I don't know. Using John's 3-D map of Downtown:

http://www.fortworth...worth/3dmap.htm

One can see that it is approximately equidistant to Hyde Park, Burnet Park, and the logical site for a future "Sundance Square". Referencing John's map again, the site is also in a "gap" between some of the tall buildings downtown. Since the location seems to be adequately served by open space already, I would suggest that the site would be ideally suited as the site for the next tall office, and possibly mixed-use structure in downtown.

By the way, downtown open spaces are not all created equal. Check this website for some information on what makes a successful (and unsuccessful) urban plaza:


http://www.pps.org/?...sletter_navbar

[hooked]

Thanks for posting the website, prairie pup - lots of good info there. After looking at those ideas, it's easy to see why Fort Worth's Heritage Park on the north end of downtown just doesn't work. Do you know if anybody from Fort Worth is working with this group? Trinity Uptown would be a great place to put some of these ideas into practice, especially since large spaces aren't really required. I'd love to see more of the little nooks and crannies in downtown (like the ones next to LaMadeline, MiCocina, and in front of the Burk Burnett building) open to the public, with benches, fountains, etc.

[ghughes]

Southside is lacking in usable park space

Well, there's Cobb Park and Carter Park which certainly carry a bunch of acres each. Foster Park is no slouch, either, although has been mostly consumed by the Zoo, Log Cabin Village, and soccer fields.

[RD Milhollin]

Southside is lacking in usable park space

Well, there's Cobb Park and Carter Park which certainly carry a bunch of acres each. Foster Park is no slouch, either, although has been mostly consumed by the Zoo, Log Cabin Village, and soccer fields.

I suppose I should qualify my statement. I was really trying to refer more specifically to the Near Southside, say, from Vickery South to Berry, and 8th Av. to I-30, or perhaps east to Riverside Dr. This area is ripe for redevelopment, and a lot is starting to happen in certain pockets. Much of the new stuff is in apartment and condo format, and these residents are in greater need of public open space than single family home dwellers who have a front and back yard. I am not saying they need a state park, but a couple of block-sized open spaces surrounded by retail would go a long way.

I know you meant FOREST Park with the zoo and all, Foster is sort of a linear park along a creek south of there, nice but not much useful space. More than the Near Southside has though!

[panthercity]

I live by magnolia and they are redoing the small firestation park behiind 7-eleven

[cberen1]

I found out why the boring equipment has been placed on the site. They are taking borings to do soil testing. This needs to be done before any new construction is done on the site. Soil testing will tell the architects and engineers what type of building and structural system can be put on the site when a new building is constructed there.

I don't know if this is an interesting turn of events or not, but workers were attaching a fabric to the fencing around the site a couple of hours ago. It looks like a construction fence now.

I can't imagine why they would do this now. Maybe they are getting ready to start some sort of meaningful construction.

[Fort Worthology]

I don't know if this is an interesting turn of events or not, but workers were attaching a fabric to the fencing around the site a couple of hours ago. It looks like a construction fence now.

I can't imagine why they would do this now. Maybe they are getting ready to start some sort of meaningful construction.

I hope so. Whether it's underground parking w/ greenspace or a surprise building, let's just get it going already. I trust XTO to do the right thing, if they'll just do it.

[DrkLts]

I'm suprised no leak in info or rumors on this. The speculation continues...

[Sam Stone]

If they're doing anything other than cleaning up the old debris they'd have to file building plans, right? Can't those be looked up? And I'm guessing that there'd be a lot of utiity work first.

[FW_Drew]

I really tried to find some information on this from within City Hall. If there are any plans other than parking, they have not made it passed the XTO circle just yet. Why it's taking them almost a year to do this, who knows?

[RD Milhollin]

This question is not what you would wish for, but what you honestly think will be the first thing put in place of the Landmark Tower. This replacement may last a few years, or it may be more permanent and stay in place more than 20 years. You also may vote for more than one choice.

John, there are not enough choices in the poll. I believe you left off "excavation museum" and "large swimming pool".

[crazyloco]

It's also possible that they could make it residential space.

[hannerhan]

This sucks.




XTO Energy to start filling hole left after implosion of tower
By SANDRA BAKER
Star-Telegram staff writer

S-T ARCHIVES/MILTON ADAMS
Demolition workers inspect the debris left by the implosion of the Landmark Tower on March 18, 2006. FORT WORTH -- XTO Energy next week will begin the process, which could take two months, of filling in the huge hole left after the implosion of the Landmark Tower at Seventh and Houston streets, a company executive said Thursday.

The block will be then be paved and landscaped and used for employee parking, said Joy Webster, vice president of facilities for XTO.

Webster said XTO would like to have the hole filled by Oct. 17, when the Texas Downtown Association starts its convention in Fort Worth. The 400-member organization honored XTO this year for its work on the Bob R. Simpson Building on the northeast corner of Seventh and Houston streets.

"We want to have it spiffy and shiny for our company," Webster said.

XTO, a Fort Worth-based independent oil and gas company, bought the vacant 30-story Landmark Tower in 2004 in a foreclosure sale. In March 2006, in a spectacular early-morning implosion, the building collapsed into a three-story pile of twisted aluminum, steel and concrete. It took workers several months to separate the debris and haul it off.

The southeast portion of the block where the building stood was excavated to several feet below street level and has been that way for more than a year. The remainder of the block has been used by construction crews working on the renovation of the Petroleum Building, another XTO property across Sixth Street. The empty block is fenced.

Webster said company executives researched possible uses for the block for several months, considering an office tower and an underground garage. Finally, the decision was made to fill it in, she said.

"I hoped there was a better plan for that block," Webster said. "We're ready to do this. We think it's dangerous and the city thinks it's dangerous."

Workers will take down the scaffolding on the Petroleum Building soon, and the scaffolding on the Bob R. Simpson Building may be down by Thanksgiving, she said.

During an informal discussion of the Downtown Design Review Board on Thursday, some board members expressed concern over the appearance of the scaffolding as well as the length of time it is taking XTO to fill in the hole.

"I couldn't say enough great things about XTO, but we have got a block in the middle of downtown that has had a chicken-wire fence around it for a long time," said Bill Boecker, chief executive and president of Fine Line Diversified Development. "It's blight, and it's been a blight a long time."

In 2005, the Baker Building was renamed the Bob R. Simpson Building for XTO's founder and chairman. XTO bought it in 2003, and renovations required that scaffolding be up for months. But almost as soon as the scaffolding came down, it went up again for the repair of high cornices.

sabaker@star-telegram.com
Sandra Baker, 817-390-7727

[Fort Worthology]

What a disappointment. After all this time, all this waiting, having that hole stuck smack dab in the middle of town, after all the waiting and silence and the assurance that it "won't be surface parking," we're getting...

...surface parking.

For shame.

[pelligrini]

Our poll hit the mark.

Maybe they will at least provide some generous setbacks for the cars and include some nicely designed public green spaces around the perimeter.

[Fort Worthology]

Took them over a year and a half to figure out they wanted to plunk a stinkin' parking lot there?

Pretty lame, XTO.

Best comment thus far from Fort Worthology's post on the subject:

"I’m fine living with the hole for a bit longer if it allows them time to develop alternate plans. Temporary blight is better than indefinite suck."

[JBB]

I would think that block is too valuable to sit as a parking lot for long.

[David Love]

I would think that block is too valuable to sit as a parking lot for long.

Like the ones in Sundance Square...?

So for the purchase price of the building, cost to demolish, repair surrounding buildings, fill in the hole, etc...

What's the final cost per employee / executive parking space?

Wonder if their stock holders would consider that a wise investment?

[JBB]

I think the story behind those Sundance lots has been well covered on the forum. There's a little more to that than the value of the land.

[Sam Stone]

I think everyone's being a bit hasty in their judgment of XTO's plans. Just suppose that they did have plans to put a big corporate HQ skyscraper there. How long do you think it would take to do environmental remediation, install new utilities, select an architect and construction firm, arrange the finances, approve a design and do all the other things before they can begin construction. I'm guessing at least a couple years. Does anyone on the forum with experience with that kind of project know what a typical timeline is? No, we don't know what their plans are, but I would say that regardless of what they do long term, filling in the hole and having surface parking is reasonable short term solution. When it comes time to build something for real, it's relatively quick and cheap to rip up some asphalt and excavate the infill.

[Fort Worthology]

I think everyone's being a bit hasty in their judgment of XTO's plans. Just suppose that they did have plans to put a big corporate HQ skyscraper there.

I have it on pretty good authority (can't say who) that XTO *does* have a design already for a tower on the site. Also some of the adjacent properties. It's not that they don't have the plans - it's just that there's no timeframe on them, at least that I've heard.

[David Love]

So then what's with all the whining?

[Fort Worthology]

So then what's with all the whining?

After over a year and a half of staring at that hole, we end up with a surface lot? They couldn't have done that a year ago and gotten it over with? Sorry, but whining (though I'm not sure I'd call it that) is entirely justified. Terrible news from an urban design standpoint. After all that time, you'd think they'd have something better to show for it.

All that time wasted, the ground sinking and destroying a new sidewalk, and all we'll have to show for it is a dead space in the heart of downtown for an indefinite time. Great. We should be ridding our core of surface lots, not building more of them.