Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

New City Hall Site

City Hall Post Office Tarrant County College

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

Poll: Future City Hall (12 member(s) have cast votes)

What site/building would make for a better City Hall in the future?

  1. TCC May Owens Center site (2 votes [16.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.67%

  2. the old Post Office (8 votes [66.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 66.67%

  3. T&P Warehouse (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. Somewhere else (2 votes [16.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.67%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 19 January 2013 - 09:00 PM

Just a thought. 

 

People have been going on about what should happen with City Hall. I'm pretty sure everyone is in agreement that the current Municipal Building is not only on the small side for a city our size and only getting smaller as the city gets bigger, it's also as pretty as a tapeworm chewing through a rotting carcass. 

 

There has been talk about moving it to the old Post Office, and it's understandable since it has plenty of room, it keeps a historic building around, and has a nice, classic facade. 

 

But I have a proposal...

 

395453_4725410506656_159721566_n.jpg

 

I was thinking of taking the spot that TCC May Owens Center now occupies. My thinking is, TCC wont have that spot forever, maybe not even into the next decade. I would want it there as another feature to the Lancaster Corridor. It would be around 4-7 floors, expandable in the back. 

Then again, maybe the abandoned T&P Warehouse would make a better location? I don't know, but that's my thought. I think it would be perfect to have a new city hall right there as a gateway to the "Throck and Houston Corridor", while facing the Lancaster Corridor at the same time. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#2 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 19 January 2013 - 10:56 PM

Move into the vacated Post Office Building:

 

A. You keep from creating an instant and very visible shuttered building on Lancaster Corridor.  The best option is for another public entity to reuse the building;

 

B. It is grand and beautiful; characteristics that a city should want for a building with such significance bestowed upon it;

 

C. Negotiating with the Tarrant County College District is not a good idea as we all learned during the building of the downtown campus;

 

D. I once read, if I am not mistaken, that the Postal Service would deed the property to the city for $1.00



#3 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 20 January 2013 - 12:53 AM

Move into the vacated Post Office Building:

 

A. You keep from creating an instant and very visible shuttered building on Lancaster Corridor.  The best option is for another public entity to reuse the building;

You're talking about the Post Office and not the May Owens Center, right? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#4 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 20 January 2013 - 01:06 AM

I'd be willing to bet TCC wants as many offices and admins as possible over at Trinity. 

The post office would be a really great option, but I wonder how much bigger it really is than the current building?



#5 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,786 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 20 January 2013 - 08:41 AM

The Post Office is only large enough to hold Council Chambers, their offices, and council supporting staff.  If the ceremonial parts of our city government were moved there, the existing City Hall building would have to remain to house other city departments.



#6 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 20 January 2013 - 12:04 PM

I would hesitate to take property facing Lancaster off the Tax Rolls. I would guess that the TIF district for southern downtown/Lancaster depends on certain anticipated marginal additions to the taxable property value there to be viable, and with the massive T&P Warehouse having only salvage value and several significant tracts covered in asphalt parking or government/non-taxed used (Convention Center, Post Office, Lanham Federal Building, Federal Courthouse, City Hall) the great need there is commercial/residential development. 

 

Acquiring the Post Office for official city functions would be great, no loss to tax rolls. Instead of giving away the bank to whatever responsible, viable developer finally revamps the T&P Warehouse, perhaps the city could agree to lease space there to house city offices on an interim basis once the building is restored, until commercial and residential leases catch up to the massive space that would be made available. Meanwhile, the city could be working to decentralize as many city functions as possible into satellite office buildings in the various sectors of the city, perhaps in designated "urban villages". This could over the long run result in lower costs and increased convenience to city customers/citizens, and provide redevelopment anchors in up and coming urban neighborhoods.



#7 JKC

JKC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 484 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:02 PM

The old post office isn't large enough and reports are that the costs to retro-fit the building for efficient city office use was significantly more than expected. Though I have not personally seen any of those test fit studies. I must say it encourages me that no one here has pointed to it as an economic catalyst for the Lancaster area. City Halls contribute to an area but they do not drive development as is readily seen in the current location. The current building is way outdated and less than attractive for sure.

#8 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:37 PM

The old post office isn't large enough and reports are that the costs to retro-fit the building for efficient city office use was significantly more than expected. Though I have not personally seen any of those test fit studies. I must say it encourages me that no one here has pointed to it as an economic catalyst for the Lancaster area. City Halls contribute to an area but they do not drive development as is readily seen in the current location. The current building is way outdated and less than attractive for sure.

 

Well no. No one is saying or probably even thinking that a City Hall would drive development. I can't name one in existence that has. 

I'm just saying having it in that spot I marked would be a nice added feature on Lancaster, while creating a building for City Hall with more room to grow in the future if (and when) needed.


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#9 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 20 January 2013 - 09:26 PM

..... I must say it encourages me that no one here has pointed to it as an economic catalyst for the Lancaster area. City Halls contribute to an area but they do not drive development as is readily seen in the current location....

 

On its face,  the "city halls do not drive development" argument may sound logical except there is another side of the economic catalyst equation: the costs of doing nothing which would actually be allowing something that the city would not desire – adding yet another prime piece of property in the Lancaster Corridor to deteriorate from lack of upkeep as is being demonstrated at the T&P Warehouse Building. 

 

The economic catalyst theory may be viewed as the city not allowing my neighbors to neglect his or her property to such an extent that it has a negative impact on the immediate neighborhood.  Instead of driving economic development, this action halts decline.

 

Without a ready to go tenant to reuse a vacated Post Office building of such prominence, I would encourage the city to relocate only the chamber and council offices into the structure along with making spaces available for non-profit, charitable civic organizations; an idea that an early comment suggested could be done adequately.

 

Keep Fort Worth folksy



#10 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:11 AM

There was a time when civic buildings like the post office, city hall, the county courthouse, etc. were magnificant buildings.  I can't imagine that the courthouse was cost justifiable in it's time.  So, back in the day how were those projects justified?  This is just an honest question because I have no idea.

 

Does a building like the Post Office have a longer projected useful life than a standard 2010 era commercial building?  If so, does that allow you to look at the value of the project over a very long term, whereas in normal commercial construction it's difficult to incorporate future cash flows beyond year 20 (or so)?

 

I guess I have a bias toward grand civic buildings.  I really like the idea of moving all the council chambers to the Post Office, but I'd also want to see the rest of the city hall offices located in a new facility nearby with complimentary design elements. 

 

I will say at the outset that I'm not overly cost concerned on this issue.  I am generally a low tax advocate and I pay a lot of taxes that I resent, but I could get behind a lax increase to pay for it.  I won't try to justify that position other than to say I have a love for beautiful buildings (hence my decade of participation on this forum).



#11 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 21 January 2013 - 01:15 PM

Nobody probably wants to hear this but it seems Fort Worthians have a "hand-me-down" attitude about City Hall relocation.  And I wish we would start thinking like a modern vibrant urban center instead of a 19th to early 20th century museum.  I'm all for historical preservation and recycling old buildings, but my guess is we're going to have to bite the property tax bullet to finance an entirely new modern building to house all municipal functions. (I, for one, like modern architecture and enjoy viewing Jeriat's design ideas in this Forum).  And from some of the previous comments, the old post office doesn't have enough room for all city functions.  The May Owen building certainly doesn't.  T&P Warehouse?  Is this structure really "city hall material" or would it be better converted into a retail/residential project as proposed a few years ago?  



#12 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 21 January 2013 - 01:19 PM

There was a time when civic buildings like the post office, city hall, the county courthouse, etc. were magnificant buildings.   I can't imagine that the courthouse was cost justifiable in it's time....Does a building like the Post Office have a longer projected useful life than a standard 2010 era commercial building?....I guess I have a bias toward grand civic buildings.... I am generally a low tax advocate, but I could get behind a lax increase to pay for it.

 

There are 254 counties in Texas.  Interestingly, of the ten most populous counties, Tarrant County having been created last, built courthouse that is widely regarded as among the most beautiful of all of the 254 courthouses in the state.

 

My reading of history details the building of the Tarrant County Courthouse was controversial because of its cost. Many citizens at the time saw it as an extravagance beyond it practical purpose.  Today, most if not all of the county’s residents justifiably regard and admire it as a priceless legacy.

 

So, turning to the Fort Worth Post Office (FWPO) building in Lancaster Corridor, I see the same eye to grandness.  Fort Worth’s Post Office is smaller but similar in style to the New York City Post Office.  Now compare Dallas’ Post Office in Ervay Street to Fort the one in Fort Worth; the comparison is stark.  Walking the halls of FWPO, one is also walking in the shadows of a place used and visited by Amon Carter, Charles Tandy, Sid Richardson, Jim Wright, Fess Parker and countless others.

 

I too will get behind any tax increase, if necessary, in order to prevent one of Fort Worth’s truly iconic buildings from going to waste. 

 

Keep Fort Worth folksy



#13 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 21 January 2013 - 04:32 PM

It seems to be much more support for converting the FWPO instead of building a brand new one. So I guess another question to that would be:

 

Would you support any expansion to the current Post Office? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#14 JKC

JKC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 484 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 21 January 2013 - 07:31 PM

I would certainly hope that doing nothing is not the opposite side of a dichotomy. The valuable and scarce opportunity along Lancaster would make me hope that we do not underdevelop anything along that corridor. I have heard that there may well be a market opportunity and buyer for the PO. That is of course pure rumor.

#15 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:09 PM

I would certainly hope that doing nothing is not the opposite side of a dichotomy. The valuable and scarce opportunity along Lancaster would make me hope that we do not underdevelop anything along that corridor. I have heard that there may well be a market opportunity and buyer for the PO. That is of course pure rumor.

 

If ever there was a place with a market opportunity, I would say it would be NYC; and yet there is:

 

Dallas - http://upload.wikime...rt_House_01.jpg

 

New York - http://www.panoramio...desc&user=89200

 

Fort Worth - http://www.fortworth.../postoffice.jpg

 

Treasure it; and keep it for the people of this town.



#16 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:47 PM

Well the Lancaster corridor is about to be well improved, http://www.fortworth...5099#entry74622



#17 JKC

JKC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 484 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:30 PM

Is anyone up on the Trump deal on the old Chicago Main Post Office?  Pretty dramatic plan as I recall but it seems like it has been a couple of years since I have heard anything on it.

 

On another somewhat tangential note, I recieved a survey from the Real Estate Council asking for suggestions on a "legacy" project to support or help make happen. I wonder if the T&P Warehouse wouldn't be a good one to suggest...



#18 austlar1

austlar1

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Location:austin TX

Posted 23 January 2013 - 07:33 PM

Isn't the real problem with the T and P warehouse building the fact that the ceilings are so low on most floors and the floors are made of very thick concrete?  That was always my understanding.  What is the average ceiling height in the upper floors of this building?  Are all the floors concrete? 



#19 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:02 AM

Isn't the real problem with the T and P warehouse building the fact that the ceilings are so low on most floors and the floors are made of very thick concrete?  

 

Wouldn't that make the structure virtually fireproof? This would be good for a building with a lot of residences. I doubt if any of the new construction in this or any other US city is this solid. No worries about hearing the people upstairs walking around, or dancing, or playing drums. 



#20 ron4Life

ron4Life

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 306 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East Tarrant County

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:10 AM

Am I missing something here? The new City Hall will be re-located inside the old post office building on Lancaster? or Is this all wishful thinking?



#21 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,425 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 24 January 2013 - 10:42 AM

There's been talk for years of the city moving the council chambers and council offices into the old post office building.  The postal service has abandoned a good portion of the building and has offered it to the city at a reasonable price.  The problem is that converting it for this use is going to be costly and it isn't really going to do much to fix overcrowding in the city's downtown office space.  There has been talk that the public atriums in the existing city hall could be converted to office space if that building is not the "public face" of official city business.  The whole idea picked up steam about 4 or so years ago, but kind of fizzled out as the city's financial problems deepened and they became involved in other more pressing logistical projects - the relocation of the Harley service center, the new public safety headquarters and training facility at the old federal depot on Felix, opening up of the police central division offices near Sundance Square.  Now that those ducks are being lined up, maybe the city hall project will move back to the front burner. 

 

As for the T&P warehouse housing city hall?  No, no, no.  As other people said above, a building that size does not need to be yanked off of the tax rolls.  The potential value of a redeveloped building could mean a huge payday for local government in the long run.



#22 dangr.dave

dangr.dave

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 655 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 03 December 2013 - 08:23 AM

An article from the Startle-Gram today: 

 

http://www.star-tele...ublic.html?rh=1



#23 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:11 PM

A few questions

 

1-Where the results of the 2004 study released? What were the findings?

 

2-Would the downtown post office relocate to a new or old building, or just go a way all together?

 

3- If City Hall where to move, what would happen to the current building?



#24 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:43 PM

A few questions

 

1-Where the results of the 2004 study released? What were the findings?

 

2-Would the downtown post office relocate to a new or old building, or just go a way all together?

 

3- If City Hall where to move, what would happen to the current building?

 

 

Re: #3, isn't it still the case that if City Hall moved the current building would remain for city department offices and such?


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#25 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 346 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 03 December 2013 - 03:05 PM


A few questions
 
1-Where the results of the 2004 study released? What were the findings?
 
2-Would the downtown post office relocate to a new or old building, or just go a way all together?
 
3- If City Hall where to move, what would happen to the current building?

 
 
Re: #3, isn't it still the case that if City Hall moved the current building would remain for city department offices and such?

That's my understanding... unfortunately. Possibly the only building downtown I'd actually prefer to see turned into a parking lot to improve the aesthetics of the area.

#26 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,425 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 03 December 2013 - 03:11 PM

As far as I remember, the 2004 study showed exactly what we all knew: converting the post office will be very expensive and it will do little to help the city's space issues.  The biggest change since then is that the necessary relocation of the fire/police facilities has been addressed.



#27 gdvanc

gdvanc

    Elite Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 740 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington

Posted 03 December 2013 - 04:48 PM

The Post Office would make a beautiful City Hall in theory, but wasn't the price steep for the amount of space? And wasn't parking going to be an issue?

 

What level of protection does the building have?

 

S-T: it's Hedrick, not Hendrick.



#28 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,425 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 03 December 2013 - 08:00 PM

National register and Texas historic landmark

#29 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,786 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 03 December 2013 - 10:49 PM

The National Register and Texas Historic Landmark designation give no legal protection against demolition.  It is designated as a Demolition Delay structure with the city.  This means that they can apply for demolition with the Landmarks Commission and they can delay it up to 180 days.  The owner would still have to conduct one meeting with parties interested in saving the building during those 180 days. 



#30 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 04 December 2013 - 09:26 AM

The National Register and Texas Historic Landmark designation give no legal protection against demolition.  It is designated as a Demolition Delay structure with the city.  This means that they can apply for demolition with the Landmarks Commission and they can delay it up to 180 days.  The owner would still have to conduct one meeting with parties interested in saving the building during those 180 days. 

 

If this designation is true, who in their right mind would propose the demolition of the Fort Worth Post Office?  What edifice or development could ever replace it!

 

It is fantastically unimaginable.

 

Keep Fort Worth folksy



#31 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 04 December 2013 - 10:02 AM

 

 

If this designation is true, who in their right mind would propose the demolition of the Fort Worth Post Office?  What edifice or development could ever replace it!

 

It is fantastically unimaginable.

 

Keep Fort Worth folksy

 

 

 

 

At one point in time, there was a plan to demolish the Tarrant County Courthouse and replace it with a concrete box building with a roadway running through the middle of it.  Never, ever underestimate the bad ideas people can come up with.  (This is why we need better historic protections in this city.)


- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#32 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,786 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:48 AM

Rename, the designation is true.  You can verify it on the City of Fort Worth's Zoning Map.   The only legal protection against demolition the Post Office has right now is 180 days. 

 

Fortworthology is correct in his statements about the Courthouse.  When the now demolished Civil Courts Building was constructed, it wa a part of a master plan to build a companion building on the east side of the Courthouse, expand both buildings vertically as needed, then demolish the current Courthouse and construct Main Street between Weatherford and Belknap Streets.  It's fortunate that later County Commissioners decided that this was not a good idea and they are planning to restore the west portico.  However, it still remains completely undesignated locally and could be demolished whenever Tarrant County officials decided to do it. 



#33 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,098 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 04 December 2013 - 01:30 PM

Pretty sure if a bulldozer showed up at wither of those two sites they would have to fight me first.

#34 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:08 PM

As far as I remember, the 2004 study showed exactly what we all knew: converting the post office will be very expensive and it will do little to help the city's space issues.  The biggest change since then is that the necessary relocation of the fire/police facilities has been addressed.

 

Here is a thought/plan:

 

The city sells the Lone Star Gas Building  http://www.fortworth...ure.com/gas.htm to a developer who might convert it into residential units and ground level retail; used the money from the sale to convert the post office into space for the Council, the Attorney, the Tax and the City Manager offices; and the Water Department and other city offices in the Lone Star Gas Building move back into the current city hall.

 

As for helping the city's space issues, there is actually a lot of space in the rear of the post office complex; enough that I think could be developed into offices and a below grade council chamber. - obviously a design a "smart' architectural firm could pull off.



#35 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:52 PM

Pretty sure if a bulldozer showed up at wither of those two sites they would have to fight me first.

 

I'll be right there with ya. 

I guess I'm not the only one surprised that talks are picking up once again...? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#36 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 11 January 2015 - 05:36 PM


 

rHvcRAV.jpg

 

As for helping the city's space issues, there is actually a lot of space in the rear of the post office complex; enough that I think could be developed into offices and a below grade council chamber. - obviously a design a "smart' architectural firm could pull off.

 

Thanks Austin. I have been waiting for good picture of the rear area of the post office.  It confirms my idea that there actually is a sufficient amount of space to design a three level municipal center with a below ground chamber chamber auditorium.  I am convinced that an design can be approved that would not alter the east, west and north facades.



#37 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,120 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 11 January 2015 - 10:47 PM

The Post Office is a fantastic building that has the presence of a city hall but is too small so would require additional adjacent or nearby buildings.

 

I still think Fort Worth should craft a longer term plan to design and build a bold, neo-classical building that is a real point of pride for the city. 

See the below link for some other impressive city halls.  Certainly some of them are huge overkill or are designed in a way that would not work today, particularly Buffalo's. 

 

http://www.governing...city-halls.html

 

In my opinion, San Francisco's is the best.  It appears to be inspired by Les Invalides in Paris.

http://en.wikipedia....i/Les_Invalides



#38 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 12 January 2015 - 12:58 AM

The Post Office is a fantastic building that has the presence of a city hall but is too small so would require additional adjacent or nearby buildings.

 

My idea is to build two-three floors below surface and to build three floor above surface = 5-6 levels.  As for departments, locate them at their specific yards etc (Parks/Rec at Gateway); Council offices located in their respective districts.  The Mayor, Legal, City Manager, Tax and council chamber at the post office site. 



#39 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 12 January 2015 - 02:37 PM

 

The Post Office is a fantastic building that has the presence of a city hall but is too small so would require additional adjacent or nearby buildings.

 

My idea is to build two-three floors below surface and to build three floor above surface = 5-6 levels.  As for departments, locate them at their specific yards etc (Parks/Rec at Gateway); Council offices located in their respective districts.  The Mayor, Legal, City Manager, Tax and council chamber at the post office site. 

 

I thought the city dropped its plan to negotiate with the U.S. Postal Service for the Lancaster post office purchase.  And the Postal Service is doing some interior renovation work there to house its postal inspectors.  So why are we having this discussion?



#40 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,425 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 12 January 2015 - 02:44 PM

The city dropped its plan to negotiate with the postal service because the postal service took the building off of the market.  There wasn't anything left to negotiate.  I suppose further discussion is just harmless post-mortem analysis.  I feel like the postal service did the city a solid.  Renovating the post office as a city hall would have been an insanely expensive vanity exercise that would have done nothing to solve city space problems downtown.  They would still be left renovating the existing city hall to accommodate workers spread across multiple leased spaces downtown.  I see no reason for the city to jump into buying the post office as long as there's no risk of it slipping away to private investors that may not be interested in preserving its historical significance. 



#41 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 13 January 2015 - 07:16 AM

I agree that with your point, which suggests that the city needs to consolidate its offices into one building.  So finding an existing structure large enough to support the city's many and varied functions but is in need of renovation work may be cost prohibitive.  I'm in favor of the city building a new and sizable city hall.   



#42 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 13 January 2015 - 03:37 PM

I thought the city dropped its plan to negotiate with the U.S. Postal Service for the Lancaster post office purchase.  And the Postal Service is doing some interior renovation work there to house its postal inspectors.  So why are we having this discussion?

 

I believe that the city was preparing a contingency plan that would have included an offer for the post office before the USPS decided to retain the post office for its own use. It is a positive scenario when the federals can do the renovation work and spare the locals from having to absorb the cost.  The city has, from my understanding, the right of first refusal when the property becomes available in the future.  For now the building's integrity will be saved.

 

BTW, it is being suggested that renovating the post office will be very costly. I am having some difficulty getting the costs of some of the county sub-courthouses, but the newest NE courthouse is budgeted for $12-13M.   I  believe that adding an annex at the post office could be in that ball park.



#43 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 13 January 2015 - 04:20 PM

 

I thought the city dropped its plan to negotiate with the U.S. Postal Service for the Lancaster post office purchase.  And the Postal Service is doing some interior renovation work there to house its postal inspectors.  So why are we having this discussion?

 

I believe that the city was preparing a contingency plan that would have included an offer for the post office before the USPS decided to retain the post office for its own use. It is a positive scenario when the federals can do the renovation work and spare the locals from having to absorb the cost.  The city has, from my understanding, the right of first refusal when the property becomes available in the future.  For now the building's integrity will be saved.

 

BTW, it is being suggested that renovating the post office will be very costly. I am having some difficulty getting the costs of some of the county sub-courthouses, but the newest NE courthouse is budgeted for $12-13M.   I  believe that adding an annex at the post office could be in that ball park.

 

Interesting information about the city having "right of first refusal" whenever, or if ever, the Lancaster post office goes on the market. Here's my thought about that:  Is our city so lame in its thinking that we sit and wait for a "hand-me down" building that may or may not be offered?  How long to wait?  Five years?  Ten years?  This reminds me of the same lameness of the city in accepting the continuation of the T&P warehouse eyesore decade after decade.

 

I respect historical preservation of structures, whether its the T&P warehouse, old post offices, or old federal buildings.  But my belief is that a forward-thinking city would want to start anew with a modern building.  What's wrong with modernity, anyway?  Sometimes I think some of us treat it like a plague.  Yes, I know there's the taxpayer's expense argument.  That too, I'm beginning to get tired of hearing.; Not being willing to make bold investments for the future by building something new instead of doing it "on the cheap" by moving into a hand-me-down building, .It's that kind of attitude that leads to the decline of a city.
.



#44 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 13 January 2015 - 06:33 PM

I have to disagree with your post [#43]. :no:



#45 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,786 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:47 PM

I don't think the city will wait to see what the USPS will do in the future.  They will probably proceed with finding a way to expand City Hall, build a new one, or lease/purchase other buildings. I think the reason they were given first right of refusal was that there still might be interest from both parties to do business with each other.  Although the city is not necessarily the best steward for a historic building, at least they are not developers who would demolish the Post Office at a heartbeat.  Remember, the building is not designated as a local landmark, so it could be torn down.  It's Demolition Delay, which means a developer could wait 6 months and then they could legally demolish it.



#46 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 13 August 2017 - 06:18 PM

The United States Postal Service is once again facing large losses. I am a strong believer in the USPS; believe that it is essential to our way of life;  and it is constitutionally mandated.

 

I also still want the Lancaster Avenue Post Office as our City Hall.  It is so beautiful, grand and it radiates gravitas equaling the Courthouse.

 

Will the current economic problems facing the USPS present the City with another opportunity to get this magnificent building?



#47 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,198 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 13 August 2017 - 08:07 PM

I've heard speculation (possibly wrong) that the Post Office withdrew its offer so it could sell the building at a higher price years down the road.

 

Personally, I'd rather the Post Office building continue being used as its original purpose.


- Dylan


#48 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 13 August 2017 - 08:26 PM

I've heard speculation (possibly wrong) that the Post Office withdrew its offer so it could sell the building at a higher price years down the road.

 

Personally, I'd rather the Post Office building continue being used as its original purpose.

 

I think that Federal Law provides other governmental agencies and entities the "Right of First Refusal".  Before USPS decided to keep and renovate the facility for its own use, the City had express a strong interest in exercising its RFR.  The City, the HFW and the community will certainly weigh in on any attempt to sell the building to any private group wanting to purchase the P.O.B.  You can be sure that the City would not want what is currently happening with the T&P Warehouse to become the situation with the P.O.B. 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: City Hall, Post Office, Tarrant County College

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users