Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

TXU Power Plant/Smoke Stacks


  • Please log in to reply
135 replies to this topic

Poll: Should the Smokestacks be Demolished? (47 member(s) have cast votes)

Should the Smokestacks be Demolished?

  1. Yes, they are eyesores. (20 votes [42.55%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.55%

  2. No, they are a historic landmark to the city. (27 votes [57.45%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.45%

  3. I have no opinion. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 552 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 15 June 2005 - 07:14 AM

2 smokestacks set to come down
Posted Image

By Mark Horvit and Bill Teeter

Star-Telegram Staff Writers


FORT WORTH - The TXU plant smokestacks, a signature sight in the central city for more than 50 years, could be coming down.

The city has approved demolition permits for the stacks and much of the rest of the old plant, which is on land being purchased by Tarrant County College for a future downtown campus.

The stacks present a safety hazard, said Tom Kleckner, a spokesman for TXU Power.

"There's a risk of pieces falling off and injuring someone," Kleckner said. Studies commissioned by TXU have shown that the stacks are unsafe, he said.

Mayor Mike Moncrief said that he was unaware of the demolition plans but that he would like to see the smokestacks saved if possible.

"Those smokestacks have been a landmark for our city for a long time," Moncrief said. "I would hate to lose them if they could be saved."

But safety must be the priority, he said.

"I would err on the side of caution," Moncrief said. "If there is a safety concern, you have to do what you have to do."

The taller stack was built in 1921, the other in 1950, Kleckner said. The plant, key to the development of downtown Fort Worth, was last used in 2002. Two older chimneys were demolished in the 1980s.

The decision to remove the stacks was made in talks between TXU and the college, Kleckner said.

Other portions of the plant will be removed as well. One boiler room will remain to be used by TCC.

"We realize the sentimental value that this has," Kleckner said.

Promoters of the Trinity Uptown plan said they had hoped that the stacks would be preserved to complement the $435 million flood-control and economic-development project. The stacks are featured in artists' renderings depicting future development in the area north of downtown and are considered a link to the area's past.

"We'd like to keep them," said Jim Oliver, general manager of the Tarrant Regional Water District, the agency spearheading the uptown plan.

Eight permits -- one for each stack and six of the smaller buildings on the property -- were applied for and issued June 2, said Development Director Bob Riley.

All such applications are sent to the planning department to be screened to make sure the structures have no official historic designation. If not, the permits are issued, Riley said.

Local historical-society members met with representatives of the college and Trinity Uptown project Tuesday to learn more about the demolition plans.

College officials could not be reached for comment late Tuesday afternoon.

James Toal, whose architectural design firm, Gideon Toal, has been working with TCC on its downtown campus, said the stacks will be demolished because of "life and safety issues. If we do things to bring people back to the river, they need to have faith that it's safe."

Edited by John T Roberts, 28 September 2005 - 05:47 PM.


#2 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 15 June 2005 - 07:47 AM

'bout time them eyesores go away. now lets not get all attached to them. they just smokestacks, featureless plain ol' smokestacks. i can understand preservationists wanting to keep the original facade of the Montgomery Wards building (even tho I like the hole thru it) or when everyone got upset that 7th street theater got demolished that had historic status. but these stacks, historic??? they were just built for function and purpose, not to be ft worth's equivelent to washington's monument or st. louis' arches. c'mon we cant be like pack rats, gotta get rid of stuff eventually :huh:

#3 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 15 June 2005 - 07:56 AM

Yes, Drklts, they are historic. They define the power plant and mark its location on the skyline. The city allowed 8 demolition permits, mostly for mechanical items like the cooling towers, and miscellaneous metal buildings. In my opinion, all of those metal items relating to the functional use of the plant can be removed. However, I am against the demolition of any permanent masonry structure. The main plant, the plant office, and the smokestacks should remain.

I'm also not sure that many of you know the plant's historic significance. The current building was constructed in 1912 on the site of Fort Worth's first power plant. When it was first built, the existing building was the only power plant for the city. Current plans call for the main plant building to remain; however, it is not designated as a local historic landmark.

I also have another question for you Drklts, what buildings or structures in Fort Worth do you feel should be designated as historic? I would like to see a list from you, and if you feel that nothing in the city is worthy, please state your reasons why.

By the way, I added the poll above to the original post.

Edited by John T Roberts, 15 June 2005 - 10:57 AM.


#4 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 15 June 2005 - 08:06 AM

John, I'll work on a list after work, figured I'd sign on the forum on my break so I got limited time. I still am for the removal of the stacks since every photo of downtown from the north, they seem "in the way" of the shot. but the base or office building still looks architecturally significant. I dont mind preserving that part since it does look historic. would the TCC campus incorporate it into their building or will they demolish most of it?

#5 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 15 June 2005 - 08:10 AM

Current plans call for the main plant building to remain. However, if TCC can't find a use for it, then there is a possibility it could be demolished at a later date.

#6 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 15 June 2005 - 08:37 AM

I'll be the first to admit that there are some things that are worth saving, but smoke stacks?

Wanting to keep smoke stacks as historical makes the whole preservation movement look silly to the general public. The general public gives it support to the cause and it works. The general public removes its support and the cause will eventually die as there is only so much limited donated funds.

Pick and choose the battles wisely. Smoke stacks are basically eyesores that gave out pollutants. Your basically asking the public to support pollution, that is how average joe will see it and he does not like it at all.

#7 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 15 June 2005 - 10:06 AM

John, I'll work on a list after work, figured I'd sign on the forum on my break so I got limited time. I still am for the removal of the stacks since every photo of downtown from the north, they seem "in the way" of the shot. but the base or office building still looks architecturally significant. I dont mind preserving that part since it does look historic. would the TCC campus incorporate it into their building or will they demolish most of it?

View Post



John- Im with you..they are important and I think TCC should incorporate the building and the smokestacks into their design. They arent in the way they are a part of history. It doesnt make preservationists look silly to want to save a smoke stack anymore then it makes a person who loves cars look silly to save a knob off of a radio because it was original. they are a part of fort worth..it would be like demolishing the smoke stack in Thurber Tx because its in the way of the sky line. I think they should stay it would be like demolishing the old fort bulidings just down from the smoke stacks on the other side of the river......Thats just my opinion.. :huh:

#8 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,702 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 15 June 2005 - 10:52 AM

I was under the initial impression that the smokestacks were apart of the original campus design.

Personally, I don't feel strongly either way.

All I want for Christmas is 20,000 new jobs downtown and for that ugly Purina plant to be blown to hell. :huh:

#9 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 15 June 2005 - 12:04 PM

CJ, they were part of the original campus design and the Trinity River Vision.

#10 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 15 June 2005 - 12:56 PM

I think they should remain. its our road map of where weve been and where we are going....If we tear down all of our history..how will we know where we have been?

#11 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 15 June 2005 - 03:31 PM

both stacks dont even match!!! ;)

#12 360texas

360texas

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,427 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW Fort Worth, Texas USA
  • Interests:Digital photography, computers since 1980, Panorama imaging, world travel. After 37 years retired Federal Service 1999.

Posted 15 June 2005 - 03:57 PM

If they don't match.. it is of no matter. The stacks are a matter of history and as long as they are structually safe ( by a Texas State licensed structural engieer and are environmentally safe...) then all is ok. Keep'em its a matter of history.

What works.. really works.

Posted Image

Dave

Dave still at

360texas45x145.png
Visit 360texas.com


#13 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 15 June 2005 - 03:58 PM

How long has the Purina plant been there. Isn't is Historic? Don't tear it down, it is historic. ;)

Smoke stacks should be saved, what a riot. No wonder I stopped contributing to Historic Fort Worth, they want to save SMOKE STACKS!!!!

Modern cities do not save smoke stacks as history. Should we save antenna towers too b/c they have stood for so long?

Save the real historic stuff, not the foolish things like smoke stacks. Come on people, get real.

#14 360texas

360texas

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,427 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW Fort Worth, Texas USA
  • Interests:Digital photography, computers since 1980, Panorama imaging, world travel. After 37 years retired Federal Service 1999.

Posted 15 June 2005 - 04:11 PM

Agreed. If Purina significantly contributed to our history.. then they too should be a matter of history.

Maybe the powerplant can be turned into an onsite library.... AND museum. Which by the way could be a Tourist destination along with the Purina Plant.

What works.. usually does work very well.

Dave

Dave still at

360texas45x145.png
Visit 360texas.com


#15 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 15 June 2005 - 04:42 PM

Me and youngalum the only ones on the same page?
Can anyone explain the historic status of two giant PIPES?
two non-decorative feature-less pipes for that matter. victorian? roman? what style are we trying to preserve???
how can it be said they contibute to the skyline? only if you say it contributed to the pollution in the "sky" itself. ;)

#16 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 552 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 15 June 2005 - 06:21 PM

I like the smoke stacks. I don't think they're an eyesore at all. Now that SBC building and the Purina Plant - those are eyesores. Tear those down....

Youngalum said "modern cities do not save smoke stacks as history"... that's because they probably tore them down. And, what is your definition of "modern cities"? ...Dallas? Many consider Dallas to be a more modern city than FW. Well, Dallas basically has very little of its history left because they tear things like the Dr Pepper plant down and replace them with grocery stores. Even recently, they moved the little log cabin near the old red courthouse downtown so they could replace it with something more "modern". History is what is responsible for allowing a "modern city" get to where they are today... The power plant and smoke stacks are a part of FW history, like it or not. But, FW has a unique opportunity to recycle that cool old power plant into something cool. The smoke stacks could even be changed into something more attractive. I'm not saying this is what should be done, but what if they converted them into vertical signage... we're losing the lights on the Tandy Center that say Fort Worth/Radio Shack, etc. What if on the smoke stacks they used neon to spell out "Cat Island", or "Fort Worth/Uptown" (Fort Worth on one, Uptown on the other) or "FORT WORTH" or something along those lines.

There is a grain elevator along 35 in Dallas that has been converted... I believe it's painted and has neon rings around it. I definitely thing smoke stacks can be converted or incorporated into something very cool. I also beleive that at the Magnolia Station in Dallas, they either saved or built faux smoke stacks as a part of that urban design. I know there is one near the Rock Fish in the interior of the complex and I think there may be more than one...

Just a thought... it only takes some dynamite to destroy something forever, but it takes creativity to recycle something old into something new unique. You can't tell me they can't make those stacks safe if they want to... I think that's just an excuse to justify tearing them down. Just my opinion...

#17 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 15 June 2005 - 06:47 PM

Gosh, I like the smokestacks as part of the TU plant.

But I don't like them enough to turn it into a make-or-break issue.

Let 'em go, and pick another place for this kind of argument.

#18 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,943 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midland, Tx. for now

Posted 15 June 2005 - 08:43 PM

I don't understand some people. Those who demean the idea of preservation for mechanical/industrial landmarks seem to hold as much regard for a smokestack as an empty paint can - "It's just a concrete pipe". This oversimplification borders on ignorance.

Smokestacks are large, highly visible icons that help compose a city's skyline and define its image. They are easily seen from great distance, instantly recognizable and are signature features. Just because they have less detail than buildings does not mean they have no value.

I'm not leading a charge to save the towers, but that doesn't mean I won't miss them when they're gone. There used to be a classic picture on the wall where I worked in the late 1980s at the Meadows Building in Dallas. It was a Southwest Airlines jet taking off from Love Field with the skyline of downtown Dallas in the background. The most prominent feature was the old DP&L power plant with its great smokestacks. A classic skyline photo.

Again, I just don't understand selective preservation. I think anything that has been a part of our town in excess of 100 years deserves a second thought before issuing demolition permits.

I suppose we can laugh at other cities see value in bygone relics. I seem to recall a fire tower along Cesar Chavez Blvd. in Austin that should be demolished.

There is a rather large coal-gas storage tank in Troy, NY that could be run through with a bulldozer.

Aren't there old water viaducts still standing in parts of Britain and Europe?

Look out in Thurber. They have an out-of-work brick kiln smokestack. Those fools even named their local restaurant after it.

Seems the great cosmopolitan city of Chicago has a water tower preserved.

Mesquite has a telecommunications tower that is probably worthy of demolition. Oh wait, that's too new.

There are smokestacks in Durham, SC; Spokane, WA; New York, NY; and other cities that have been preserved or are planned to be.
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#19 ghughes

ghughes
  • Guests

Posted 15 June 2005 - 09:46 PM

A power plant without a smokestack is like a day without sunshine.

The smokestack helps pull air through the boiler due to lower pressure at the top. Sure, forced convection took some of the magic out of it, but there's a sweetness to the fact that those few tens of feet will actually help produce an air flow. So save the plant building because it has the nice brick work and detailing that makes it a special place. But the associated smokestacks have meaning for those of us, a small group admittedly, who find beauty in the passive harnessing of nature's forces.

(The above written for Mechanical Engineers everywhere)

#20 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 15 June 2005 - 10:02 PM

I think we should look at the bigger picture here....its all the same do you see the glass half empty or half full...do you see nasty, ulgy smoke stacks or do you see beautiful history that gives us that "were home" feeling when you see them..something familiar something to ground you...yes they are smoke stacks...and yes we are the tree huggers of preservationists..but with out those tree huggers we wouldnt have trees..... ;)

#21 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 552 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 15 June 2005 - 10:07 PM

and we all need to remember that the smoke stacks are dormant. They're no longer causing any sort of air pollution.... Of course, no telling what will be released into the air when they come crashing down in a giant cloud of smoke.

#22 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 15 June 2005 - 10:39 PM

I knew this morning when the story was published in the paper that because of my schedule that I wouldn't get to post an explanation until late this evening. That said, I will probably be brief.

I would like to commend those who have posted their reasons why the stacks should be kept. Many of you have said the same things that I would have. I also appreciate the comments of the opposing view points. First of all, the stacks were a permanent part of the power plant. Other equipment that was erected and utilized in the operation was designed to wear out and eventually be replaced. The second part to this is the stacks are an icon of the plant itself. If TXU wants that building to be identified as what it was in the city's history, then the stacks shoud remain. When many people think of old power plants, they do think of the smokestacks that adorned them. The article states that TXU did study their safety and determined that they are unsafe. The studies were done to support demolition. If we want to really find out about their structural soundness, then an independent structural engineer should do a study and report his findings. If they are unsafe, then either demolition should be considered, or stabilization methods and costs should be explored. Making the stacks structurally sound might be only a very small fraction of the cost of the Trinity River Vision or the TCC campus. I'm also afraid that the permission to demolish everything in the plant but the main building may eventually lead to that building's demolition because the site was not designated as a historic landmark at any time. If TCC determines they can't use the building, then there is a good chance it might be demolished, and an argument for it would be that demolition was permitted for the other parts of the plant back in 2005.

Youngalum, how do you know that Historic Fort Worth has come out on the record for saving the stacks? I don't see that anywhere in the article or on this forum.

Andy is correct in that other plant's smokestacks have been preserved in other cities as a way of utilizing them into a preservation project. I think there have been some stacks that have been converted into restaurants. The Power Plant in Baltimore's Inner Harbor is one project that comes to mind that kept the stacks as a part of the preservation of the plant. Barnes & Noble have a bookstore in the building.

My biggest complaint about what has happened in this city regarding historic preservation is not whether an individual building is saved or lost, but that the process has not been followed. If you haven't read it online, I would highly urge everyone on this forum to read the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. It authorizes a Section 106 Review of an affect of a project on any historic building or structure is to be made before any Federal dollars are spent on that project. I'm generalizing here to be brief. What I see here is that the plant is a part of the TRV and it is getting federal funds. The 106 review was not done and the city issued demolition permits. This is not right. The process should be followed, and then if the 106 Review determines that demolition of the plant office and the smokestacks would not adversely affect the historic character of the plant itself, then let them come down.

The same thing happened with the Interurban Substation at Spinks Airport. The building was demolished before the process had even started. Anyway, it's late and I'm tired.

#23 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 16 June 2005 - 12:45 AM

and we all need to remember that the smoke stacks are dormant. They're no longer causing any sort of air pollution.... Of course, no telling what will be released into the air when they come crashing down in a giant cloud of smoke.

View Post


LMAO! ;)

I feel for them "huggers" in Fw. The SA Alamo Quarry MarketOn the Reel preserved the old smoke stacks/shafts from the old Rock Quarry into what is now a wonderful retail/entertainment destination. The shafts were preserved in the AMC theatre for stair well support. We should at least explore the options of preservation/ incorporation for the upcoming TCC scheduled to be set for 2012? I wanna say.

It is def. historical, a landmark of sorts, and has some significance to the TXU or XTO ownership. 2 companies who def. helped shape FW. Perhaps a selfless act of a "philanthropic calling" would both allow preservation and incorporation to the TCC. Just an idea. :z:

Just reread your latest post John. TOTALLY AGREE! If these steps or procedures were fought hard to enact and put into place, then they should be respected. Irregardless of the outcome. A story worth sending to TV Media outlets. Let's face it, your city's history is fading in the wind. We just might have another 7th Street Theatre on our hands here. :D

Edited by safly, 16 June 2005 - 12:51 AM.

COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#24 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 16 June 2005 - 04:51 AM

Thanks for bringing up the Quarry Market, I am familiar with that project, as well. I also know that there are other examples.

#25 ghughes

ghughes
  • Guests

Posted 16 June 2005 - 05:58 AM

safly wrote:

A story worth sending to TV Media outlets.

If we can add something lurid that might work. But a story about "process" is a tough sell since it requires actual thinking on the part of everyone involved.

#26 mrowl

mrowl

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Location:Grapevine

Posted 16 June 2005 - 05:59 AM

for years I have driven by there and thought "I can't wait until they tear those down". And today I still agree. It's a smoke stack. Next they are going to want to save the stairs on the Landmark tower.

And I would bet that most who say "Save the Stack" is over 40 years old. And most people under 40, want progress to be made in DTFW.

#27 ghughes

ghughes
  • Guests

Posted 16 June 2005 - 06:24 AM

Guilty. Over 40.

However, all those years have provided opportunities to see progress really screw some stuff up and progress really do some great things. I'm fully in favor of progress since I see the alternative as stagnation and death. But smart progress, not just whatever is called progress.

So the question I have is: how will keeping/preserving the stacks prevent progress?

And I'll propose that the engineering and craft work necessary to preserve the stacks might provide career progress for those engaged in the work. The project also might expand the horizons of those planning it if they have to deal with something more complex than dynamite around the stack bases and dust control. And finally the artistic opportunities in mixed media (old/new, etc.) should not be ignored.

#28 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,943 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midland, Tx. for now

Posted 16 June 2005 - 07:51 AM

for years I have driven by there and thought "I can't wait until they tear those down".  And today I still agree.  It's a smoke stack.  Next they are going to want to save the stairs on the Landmark tower.

And I would bet that most who say "Save the Stack" is over 40 years old.  And most people under 40, want progress to be made in DTFW.

View Post


Nope, not guilty, but getting close. Still just 32. I don't think age plays a part, though. I would have said the same thing 10 years ago. I just have an appreciation for old structures, whether they are multi-story office buildings or industrial artifacts.

But don't worry, I'm not going to chain myself to the stacks. Bring on the sky apartments, robot maids and flying cars!
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#29 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,943 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midland, Tx. for now

Posted 16 June 2005 - 08:35 AM

Funny thing, today I received an email about another industrial artifact that is facing redevelopment.

Boston Water Pumping Station
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#30 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 16 June 2005 - 09:38 AM

for years I have driven by there and thought "I can't wait until they tear those down".  And today I still agree.  It's a smoke stack.  Next they are going to want to save the stairs on the Landmark tower.

And I would bet that most who say "Save the Stack" is over 40 years old.   And most people under 40, want progress to be made in DTFW.

View Post


Nope, not guilty, but getting close. Still just 32. I don't think age plays a part, though. I would have said the same thing 10 years ago. I just have an appreciation for old structures, whether they are multi-story office buildings or industrial artifacts.

But don't worry, I'm not going to chain myself to the stacks. Bring on the sky apartments, robot maids and flying cars!

View Post



I agree Andy, age shouldnt even be a factor. My entire life I have had a love for historic, old buildings and homes and antiques. Most of what is in my house is an antique, and so is my house. I like you wont chain myself to them..but I would be sad to see them go..

#31 FWMike

FWMike

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Swimming, painting, antiques, gardening...

Posted 16 June 2005 - 12:10 PM

This post might qualify more as "local history", but does anyone recall the time period when Reddy Kilowatt was affixed near the top of the taller smokestack? I have a postcard depicting this, however I don't actually remember seeing it in person. I do remember seeing a life size figure of the electric utility mascot outside of the service center on Montgomery. It seems like he was removed in the late 70's. And then I believe there was one attached to the electric building on 7th street as well.

#32 mrowl

mrowl

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Location:Grapevine

Posted 16 June 2005 - 12:24 PM

So the question I have is: how will keeping/preserving the stacks prevent progress?


View Post


By some developer having to pay more to preserve them, when they can buy a different property down the road and not pay the price?

#33 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 16 June 2005 - 12:27 PM

Welkommen to ze Forum Mike!

(not sure if spelled correctly)

I would side with preservation and incorporation here. The developers can always build around it and on top of it. A huge movie theatre would be nice, or campus facilities for TCC, utilizing the structure for aesthetic purposes only. Not too sure if it is stable for load capacity. This reminds me of an old useless water well in the heart of DTChicago. It had some REALLY significant local history, and now it is a major destination stop for visitors on Michigan Ave. The Parthenons are useless too, but they ain't goin nowhere.

The essence of history is best captured with a WIDE angle lens. :D - SAfly
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#34 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 16 June 2005 - 12:40 PM

<This post might qualify more as "local history", but does anyone recall the time period when Reddy Kilowatt was affixed near the top of the taller smokestack?>

I remember, and yes, I "qualify".

If Reddy Killowatt could be reconstructed and mounted on the tallest stack it might serve the same role as the neon Pegasus did and does in Dallas. I personally would like to see the towers converted into "climbing walls", a place for climbers to practice, with a free-drop rappell down the inside of the stack. I would also like to see the power plant structure itself developed into a natatorium (indoor swimming pool-possibly Olympic competition size) for student and community use, and while I am posting, how about requiring the architect of the TCC Central Campus "bridge" over the Trinity to incorporate the same size elements into the underside of that structure as is present in the Congress Street Bridge in Austin in order to provide a home for bats in the summer?

Pup

#35 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 552 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 16 June 2005 - 06:18 PM

for years I have driven by there and thought "I can't wait until they tear those down".  And today I still agree.  It's a smoke stack.  Next they are going to want to save the stairs on the Landmark tower.

And I would bet that most who say "Save the Stack" is over 40 years old.  And most people under 40, want progress to be made in DTFW.

View Post


Not Guilty... Under 40. And, wanting progress in DTFW and wanting to save a historical property are mutually exclusive desires. I want both... I want FW to build new buildings and become a bigger more respected urban center. But, cities that are all new are boring. Look at what most consider to be the greatest city on Earth - NYC... It's a vibrant mix of old and new. The sunbelt cities are already considered to be newer and more modern that Eastern Seaboard cities as it is... we're looked at as being boring by the older, more cosmopolitan cities already. It's little elements like old smoke stacks and unique things like that that make a city standout from all the other sunbelt cities. Not that these smoke stacks are THAT important... It's the principle of the matter. Howerever, I do think that the new TRV part of FW runs the risk of being "too new" and if developed wrong, FW's TRV/Uptown will end up being suburban feeling... Our new riverwalk may end up being like SA's on steroids, but if it lacks character then it won't matter. SA's age and history are what make it the charming tourist destination that it is...

My point is simple. FW is a great city now because it does have elements of its history still visible to residents and visitors. If you tear down all the historical landmarks then all that will be evident to visitors will be the new stuff... and that's not impressive.

#36 DrkLts

DrkLts

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,092 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S. Fort Worth

Posted 16 June 2005 - 10:28 PM

for years I have driven by there and thought "I can't wait until they tear those down".  And today I still agree.  It's a smoke stack.  Next they are going to want to save the stairs on the Landmark tower.

And I would bet that most who say "Save the Stack" is over 40 years old.  And most people under 40, want progress to be made in DTFW.

View Post


By the way, Landmark Tower also has a long rusted pipe going all the way up the side of the building. Let's save it too. Maybe even attach it to whatever XTO builds in the tower's place. Oh, I'm under 40 and hungry for progress. :D

#37 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 17 June 2005 - 08:31 AM

It's the principle of the matter. Howerever, I do think that the new TRV part of FW runs the risk of being "too new" and if developed wrong, FW's TRV/Uptown will end up being suburban feeling... Our new riverwalk may end up being like SA's on steroids, but if it lacks character then it won't matter. SA's age and history are what make it the charming tourist destination that it is...


Oh Willy. You're my HERO! :D

I agree on the "loss" of history POV. I do also agree on broadcasting a warning to the exact issues and conflicts associated with the TR"Vision". Seems like the blind FOLLOWING the blind on this one. No REAL leadership involved here. SA's Riverwalk scene is unique, charming, and designed with an INTIMATE atmos in mind. You can chow down on some good BBQ at the Republic Restaurant, sip on some Marg's, and wave at the close by passing boats, or listen in on a fine tuned mariachi band serenading across the rio. Heck, we even have a chef who tapes his shows on a river boat for the Food Network. It is a scene unlike any other that I know. I sense a very broad view and lack of intimate design with the TRV. Too many wide open spaces, boat activity, and people watching from afar, too afar. I hope that the TRV holds some value for nightlife entertainment/dining on a SA Riverwalk level. To say the least. At the TRV presentations some 3 or 4 years ago, they proposed a quasi Boston Harbor appeal. The HAbor in BAstin is great for a city that size, it's historical content "Tea Party's", and it's activity for merchant along the east coast. But for FW, I think we've got a ways to go on that one. Just my thoughts ramblin about.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#38 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 17 June 2005 - 08:52 AM

About the Riverwalk...I don't think your average Joe american tourist looks up SA's history and goes to SA to embrace Texas' past. I think they go because it's a nice looking place that has good food and good entertainment and provides a new experience. Basically, though we might know the Riverwalk's charm comes from it's history, the charm is what attracts the visitors. If the Riverwalk was brand new and looked the same way, people would come visit it anyway. Also, I don't think the planners of the TRV want to make it into a tourist destination, just a nice place where people can live in a self-sustaining urban environment.

Now about those smokestacks...here in Buenos Aires, a developer is turning an 1800's warehouse that has been abandoned for more than 20 years into an art "village". Now that's gotta be just a tad unsafe, so it's not like the TCC can't save the smokestacks, it's that they won't. Personally, I think they should save that beautiful building in the complex with the arched windows too.

#39 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

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

Posted 17 June 2005 - 12:39 PM

I'm not a fan of industrial architecture, so normally I would say "tear 'em down." But, after watching the Baker building restoration I realize that they probably need to stay. Here's why:

The Baker restoration removed some horrible design elements that were almost universally despised. They are being replaced with some beautiful stonework that really draws upon the original design. I'm thoroughly impressed. But, the restoration could very easily have not ever been done. Absent the help of a benevolent company, this "easy to love" restoration would not have happened.

If it was this tough to get an "easy to love" restoration done, I can't imagine anyone ever committing to restore those smoke stacks some time in the future. That is, if they come down they will never, never, ever return.

I think the stacks are a unique element in the skyline. I kind of wish they were bigger.

As for the property, I think they should build an enormous aquarium on the site, like the aquarium of the Americas in New Orleans. Maybe we could have Seaworld, Cowtown.

#40 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 17 June 2005 - 01:22 PM

Not necessarly a sea world but a nice aquarium would be cool....Galveston has a great aquarium, rain forest and i-max theater all called the Moody Gardens. They look like pyramids for those that havent seen them. Inside of the aquarium are fish tanks you walk through and just amazing animals and a great atmosphere...


That would be cool too...

#41 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,315 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 17 June 2005 - 01:37 PM

safly, with everything I've read and heard about the TRV, I've never been left with the impression that the planners are shooting for a replica of the SA Riverwalk in appearance or ambiance. Sounds to me like the finished product will be more of a town lake and comparing the two seem a little (I'm using this loosely) apples to oranges.

#42 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,702 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 17 June 2005 - 03:12 PM

Me and youngalum the only ones on the same page?
Can anyone explain the historic status of two giant PIPES?
two non-decorative feature-less pipes for that matter. victorian? roman? what style are we trying to preserve???
how can it be said they contibute to the skyline? only if you say it contributed to the pollution in the "sky" itself.  :blink:

View Post



I'm 36 (37 soon :blink: ) and kinda neutral on this subject. I love the historical too, but I just don't have any warm and fuzzy feelings for the plant or the smokestacks. As long as they don't become an obstacle for the project, then I would be onboard with preserving them.

#43 cjyoung

cjyoung

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,702 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stop Six/Echo Heights/Eastwood/Forest Hill/Meadowbrook/Fossill Creek

Posted 17 June 2005 - 03:26 PM

for years I have driven by there and thought "I can't wait until they tear those down".  And today I still agree.  It's a smoke stack.  Next they are going to want to save the stairs on the Landmark tower.

And I would bet that most who say "Save the Stack" is over 40 years old.   And most people under 40, want progress to be made in DTFW.

View Post


By the way, Landmark Tower also has a long rusted pipe going all the way up the side of the building. Let's save it too. Maybe even attach it to whatever XTO builds in the tower's place. Oh, I'm under 40 and hungry for progress. :blink:

View Post


:blink:

#44 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 20 June 2005 - 10:10 AM

I saw a picture this weekend of fort worth in the 60's and its positioned so that the smoke stacks are in the forground and the more that i looked at them the more I thought they are a part of our history and should be saved...but in that photo all 4 were standing...

#45 redhead

redhead

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts
  • Location:Cultural District

Posted 20 June 2005 - 10:42 AM

I have been told that the reason the stacks are out of the picture is that in TCC's due diligence, they have been determined to be structurally unsound. I hate to say it, but i think they are goners!!

And I disagree with whoever said we are copying the SA RW. Go to Gendy and take a closer look! Nothing like the cramped RW with a five foot sidewalk...walksways are generous and lots more types of water activities.

And Pup, Reddy Kilowatt wouldn't really be appropriate---he was the creation of Alabama Power Company! (Fact---an APC exec dressed up for a Hallween party with a lightbulb on his nose...an the ad guys loved it. My second hand account came from my grandfather who was EVP of APC for 28 years.)

#46 Y2J

Y2J

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 20 June 2005 - 10:43 AM

just for humor... for those who are for the smokestacks, what are yall smokin'?!?!? :roflol:

#47 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 20 June 2005 - 10:50 AM

Not enough....we need more to smoke.....

If they are unsound they can be fixed cant they?? If they are gonners Ill ride my bike down there and say good bye.. sniff :roflol:

#48 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,659 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 20 June 2005 - 10:54 AM

My instincts tell me to save the smokestacks.

I am googling for whatever information there is out there which would demonstrate a viable reuse of the site other than completely demolishing the two towers. Is anyone having any luck finding information about successful smokestack restoration projects? I think we should really know what can be done with them before losing them forever...Remember the Original Medical Arts Tower!

I have always had a uneasy feeling about the whole Tarrant County College campus at this particular site; why can't they stay east of Main Street?

I have had issues along with the County's preferred location of a new Jail & new central college campus for starters!!

Keep Fort Worth folksy!

#49 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 20 June 2005 - 01:35 PM

I agree....I think the campus could be somewhere else...Where is the parking going to be?? I have noticed all that was a parking lot infront of the Radio Shack Building is now dirt.....are they going to keep it that way and if so where are the students going to park and what about the amount of traffic the school will bring..how are they going to deal with that??

#50 courtnie

courtnie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fort Worth Texas
  • Interests:History, Historic Preservation, Art, Antiques

Posted 20 June 2005 - 02:15 PM

Looks like Iowa cares about their smokestacks....

http://www.silosandsmokestacks.org/

its the only thing I could find about preserving smokestacks even though theirs is a bit different....still along the same lines




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users