53 replies to this topic

[Fire-Eater]

I talked to apartment manager Connie this A.M., and she said the deal will close October 26. The historic 1930s apartments will be razed after the first of the year for the construction of ca. 20 luxury, single-family homes.

[TxConnie]

Oh no way??!! I may have to move to the country, given all the demolition around here. (I love in North Himount.)

[cbellomy]

OUTRAGEOUS.

First I lose my wedding night abode (Green Oaks), and now, just that fast, our first residence? I think I'm going to throw up.

[John T Roberts]

Chris, welcome to the world of big development, weak preservation laws, and lack of designations.

[cbellomy]

Not to get overly simplistic, but it seems like most of the race to destroy our historic fabric is being funded by Dallas-based developers. Maybe that's what it's going to take to get a real popular uprising: "Make Dallas stop tearing down Fort Worth!"

I don't know my city anymore.

[Urbndwlr]

Who is doing this? I must have missed the article. I'm shocked that the economics work out where someone can tear down that many apartments to provide lower density residential.

Has anyone noticed that the population density of the near west side has apparently dropped over the last 20 years? We have seen the demolition of several smaller multifamily buildings throughout the neighborhoods, the one where the Modern now stands (okay, that was worth it) and within the expanding footprint of the UNTHSC, now the Crestwood Apartments.

We hear neighborhood association members complain about their fear of traffic congestion when new medium density residential projects are planned, however we are far far from such levels. In fact we've apparently lost population in this section of town.

I look forward to the new denser, mixed-use projects bringing more people back to the near west side, injecting more life into the section of town.

[PLS]

a friend from high school tried to lease an apartment there (just started his masters at unthsc), and they told him they weren't signing new leases, as the building was soon to be demolished... didn't think to mention it here.

regarding the dallas developers - as i've mentioned (ok, whined) in many of my posts, the world of fw based developers is terribly small, even offensively small considering the size of the city. there are even fewer equity groups (in fort worth, equity groups can be read mega wealthy families), from what i can tell. that being said, someone has to accomodate the growth of the city, so our neighbors to the east are taking full advantage. can't say i blame them either. i'd love to start up a real estate private equity office, with fw based families backing me. if anyone has some leads, i'll gladly take this one for the team

[Sam Stone]

Anyone have a pic to post? It sounds very familiar, but I just can't picture it.

[Fire-Eater]

Oh no way??!! I may have to move to the country, given all the demolition around here. (I love in North Himount.)

Love North Hi Mount? Love it while you can: there's no historic zoning or design overlays. Pre-1960 residences are disappearing at an alarming rate, replaced by gigantic zero lot-line mini-mansions and townhomes. Don't move north of I-820, though -- you'll just see more of the same, but on bigger lots.

[mmiller2002]

Well, it is private-property right? Property owners' rights are also important.

[Fire-Eater]

Well, it is private-property right? Property owners' rights are also important.

Sure they are. They're important, but they ain't sacrosanct. English common law and local ordinances, enabled by state law, provide limits to privit prop'tee rats. Thank God.

I'm a firm believer that private property rights should be curtailed with respect to historic properties.

[hannerhan]

Who is doing this? I must have missed the article. I'm shocked that the economics work out where someone can tear down that many apartments to provide lower density residential.

Has anyone noticed that the population density of the near west side has apparently dropped over the last 20 years? We have seen the demolition of several smaller multifamily buildings throughout the neighborhoods, the one where the Modern now stands (okay, that was worth it) and within the expanding footprint of the UNTHSC, now the Crestwood Apartments.

We hear neighborhood association members complain about their fear of traffic congestion when new medium density residential projects are planned, however we are far far from such levels. In fact we've apparently lost population in this section of town.

I look forward to the new denser, mixed-use projects bringing more people back to the near west side, injecting more life into the section of town.

I totally agree with this. That said, I don't think the Crestwood Apartments are so fantastic that they are worth saving in a situation like this. If they're doing single-family on that spot, I'm sure it will have to be high $$ to justify it. It's nice to see thoughtful development like Idlewild around Crestwood, so hopefully this will be more of the same...larger lots and homes which fit with the area. And we can leave the higher density closer to 7th Street where all the new development is happening. There are a lot of new homes being built in North High Mount that are too big and too ugly, but you won't see me complain when an apartment complex is torn down for new development (single family or otherwise). I'd much rather have a big mcmansion built in place of some of the ratty old duplexes and quadraplexes that are in the area, but maybe I'm in the minority.

[mmiller2002]

I'm a firm believer that private property rights should be curtailed with respect to historic properties.

How "historic" are those apartments?

[Fire-Eater]

I'm a firm believer that private property rights should be curtailed with respect to historic properties.

How "historic" are those apartments?

I'd ask, what do you define as "historic?" How old do you think it has to be? I think the apartments were built ca. 1930. But hey, Fort Worth was founded in, what, 1847? Extant architecture in this town dates from, at the earliest, ca. 1880? Even the STOCKYARDS are barely a hundred years old. Some people consider 75 years to be not old enough.

There's more to being historic than age, however. The National Park Service has guidelines set forth in the National Register of Historic Places. Crestwood Place Apartments is "historic" enough to be eligible for the NRHP. The guidelines for the NRHP are pretty much the standard used by the state and local authorities for defining "historic" for regulatory purposes.

What is amazing to me is how many NON-historic-preservationists (or is that UNhistoric preservationists?) read and post in the "Historic Buildings and Preservation" part of The Forum. I consider about a half dozen folks in here to be HPers. The rest of y'all may like or appreciate "old" buildings, but certainly wouldn't hesitate to tear one down if a buck or two may be made (but a little remorse might be expressed.) I think the majority, though you may not express yourself this way, would gladly sacrifice the historic architectural heritage of Fort Worth for the Almighty Dollar . . . uh, I mean Private Property Rights.

I'd ask Hannerhan, what is "fantastic" and just how "fantastic" does something have to be in order to be worthy of preservation? Is there a sliding scale of Dollars-versus-Historicity? How many "fantastic" buildings are there in Fort Worth? Could a historic district be "fantastic" though comprising a high density of only "nice" historic buildings? (Don't worry about a substantial historic district of Early Twentieth Century homes on Fort Worth's west side: there's not one left, due to the Teardown Epidemic.)

If "fantastic" sums of dollars may be made by individuals, should we put any restrictions on their private property rights? What about those old oak trees? Wetlands?

Just how important is money? How much is enough? Crestwood Place runs at 98 percent occupancy. I guess that's not enough (if they advertised, I bet they could get 100 percent!)

[hannerhan]

I'm a firm believer that private property rights should be curtailed with respect to historic properties.

How "historic" are those apartments?

I'd ask Hannerhan, what is "fantastic" and just how "fantastic" does something have to be in order to be worthy of preservation? Is there a sliding scale of Dollars-versus-Historicity? How many "fantastic" buildings are there in Fort Worth? Could a historic district be "fantastic" though comprising a high density of only "nice" historic buildings? (Don't worry about a substantial historic district of Early Twentieth Century homes on Fort Worth's west side: there's not one left, due to the Teardown Epidemic.)

If "fantastic" sums of dollars may be made by individuals, should we put any restrictions on their private property rights? What about those old oak trees? Wetlands?

Just how important is money? How much is enough? Crestwood Place runs at 98 percent occupancy. I guess that's not enough (if they advertised, I bet they could get 100 percent!)

I guess my feeling is that just because something is "old", it isn't automatically worth keeping.

[pelligrini]

How "historic" are those apartments?

There's more to being historic than age, however. The National Park Service has guidelines set forth in the National Register of Historic Places. Crestwood Place Apartments is "historic" enough to be eligible for the NRHP. The guidelines for the NRHP are pretty much the standard used by the state and local authorities for defining "historic" for regulatory purposes.

So how well does Crestwood fall within the guidelines for the NRHP? What criteria does it meet?

[PLS]

I guess my feeling is that just because something is "old", it isn't automatically worth keeping.

i'd agree with that. if something has substantial historical significance and would qualify as a national historical monument, then i think it deserves protection from demolition. but blocking redevelopment for the sake of saving an old building is a tougher sell for me.

so if you want to sell me, i'd ask the same question as pell:
what, in your opinion, makes crestwood fall within the guidelines of the NRHP?

[mmiller2002]

I like the old stuff as much as anyone, but at some point there needs to be a limit to how others tell the owners how they can use their investment. Were a capatilistic society, so making money on investments is a good thing. That owner didn't buy the property with any historic stipulations, so its not fair to levy new limitations after the fact.

I would much rather see those apartments stay because of the nice green lawn and trees they have. I'm sure that the new development of high $$ houses will have a nice big wall constructed along WS road for everyone to see, just like that Idlewild development. I don;t like all the walls being built. Not attractive.

[Fire-Eater]

I guess my feeling is that just because something is "old", it isn't automatically worth keeping.

Agreed. I think, however, anything eligible for the National Register of Historic Places should receive high consideration for keeping. True, just because it's "old" doesn't mean it's worth keeping. The NRHP requires more than just something being "old."

[Fire-Eater]

if something has substantial historical significance and would qualify as a national historical monument, then i think it deserves protection from demolition. but blocking redevelopment for the sake of saving an old building is a tougher sell for me.

WOW! I think you have a wide latitude there between a National Historic Site and "an old building."

If you're looking at NHS as being only criteria for saving a historic resource, then you're looking at very, very few buildings nationwide and none in Fort Worth. You truly believe Fort Worth has no historic properties worthy of regulatory protection???

I'll be back in a little while with links to sites you may check that define historical eligibility and significance within the National Register of Historic Places.

[Fire-Eater]

at some point there needs to be a limit to how others tell the owners how they can use their investment.

Regarding historic properties, you have nothing to worry about. Bulldoze away, cause they're very few restrictions. That's why there has been so much neat stuff lost.

[Dr Quest]

Regarding historic properties, you have nothing to worry about. Bulldoze away, cause they're very few restrictions. That's why there has been so much neat stuff lost.

I don't get it...are those apartments "neat"? Other than the large common lawn there is nothing "neat" about those apartments, they are worn down and outdated. I would have loved to save some of the fixtures and older historic buildings downtown but I'm going to say DTFW is much better than it was 15 years ago, that's kinda what happens with progress. I had my senior prom at Green Oaks Inn and had some other wonderful times, that's not to say it shouldn't have been razed 20 years ago...I'm sure the topless bar across the street won't mind. I will admit that I've been jaded ever since the Merry Go Round Hamburgers on Berry was torn down.

[cbellomy]

As a former residence of Crestwood Place, I can tell you that they are WONDERFUL old buildings, and there's nothing problematic about their age that a proper restoration wouldn't cure. "Neat" doesn't come close to describing these apartments, the importance of their campus to that part of the west side, or the rents they could command with a proper restoral.

This isn't just a tonedeaf move from a preservation perspective, it's also an odd one from a business perspective. I would *love* to have the cash to own, renovate, and operate that complex. I'd make a fortune.

I gotta say, I never imagined that Victory Chateau on Tulsa Way would outlast Crestwood Place.

They oughtta clear all those corpses out of Greenwood and develop that space, too.

[Fort Worthology]

I don't get it...are those apartments "neat"? Other than the large common lawn there is nothing "neat" about those apartments, they are worn down and outdated.

People used to say the same thing about Leuda-May, Markeen, LaSalle, and Modern Drug Village, too. The community is far richer now that they have been restored and reopened as successful apartment redevelopments rather than leveled for new development.

I would have loved to save some of the fixtures and older historic buildings downtown but I'm going to say DTFW is much better than it was 15 years ago, that's kinda what happens with progress.

One of the reasons downtown Fort Worth is so great is because of its historic buildings. *Restoring* them was progress. Downtown Fort Worth would be a much worse place if we'd looked at those "worn down and outdated" buildings like the Burk Burnett, Flatiron, Sinclair, Sanger, Ashton, W. T. Waggoner, and T&P and demolished them for new buildings. Such is also the case in smaller neighborhoods.

[hannerhan]

I don't get it...are those apartments "neat"? Other than the large common lawn there is nothing "neat" about those apartments, they are worn down and outdated.

People used to say the same thing about Leuda-May, Markeen, LaSalle, and Modern Drug Village, too. The community is far richer now that they have been restored and reopened as successful apartment redevelopments rather than leveled for new development.

I'm not saying I don't think they did a good job with those restorations, but that statement is pure speculation since no one knows what kind of development might have gone in their place.

[Fort Worthology]

I'm not saying I don't think they did a good job with those restorations, but that statement is pure speculation since no one knows what kind of development might have gone in their place.

I do not consider it "speculation," because by maintaining these older structures we maintain a link with our history and heritage, thereby enriching our community and its sense of place. Preservation and renewal of historic buildings, districts, and landscapes affirm the continuity and evolution of urban society.

[Dr Quest]

The projects North of downtown were old and just as historic as Crestwood Place....no one had a problem tearing those down for the Radio Shack campus.

[vjackson]

The projects North of downtown were old and just as historic as Crestwood Place....no one had a problem tearing those down for the Radio Shack campus.

But that was for the good of DTFW (sarcasm). So few people screamed about preservation because tearing down Riply A. got rid of "certain people". Crestwood is an older apartment community and its historic qualities are definitely debateable. I'm sure many people in the area would think that ridding the area of transient renters and adding single family homes would be better for that neighborhood too.

[Fort Worthology]

The projects North of downtown were old and just as historic as Crestwood Place....no one had a problem tearing those down for the Radio Shack campus.

But that was for the good of DTFW (sarcasm). So few people screamed about preservation because tearing down Riply A. got rid of "certain people". Crestwood is an older apartment community and its historic qualities are definitely debateable. I'm sure many people in the area would think that ridding the area of transient renters and adding single family homes would be better for that neighborhood too.

I don't know where these statements about Crestwood being some sort of transiet-infested disaster area are coming from - the place has always seemed well-run and clean to me. I have heard nothing but great reviews from residents. It's not a blight at all.

As for Ripley Arnold, you can debate the Radio Shack thing all you want - as a general rule I'm not sad to see those sorts of "projects" go regardless of their age. They are a poor solution to affordable/public housing and are a failed design. We ought to replace them with better integrated solutions. Note that this thinley-veiled racism accusation does not play into it at all - they are simply not a good solution. The Radio Shack issue is for another discussion, though for the record I'm not sure I wouldn't have rather seen a superior replacement for Ripley Arnold integrated into a mixed-income New Urbanist development rather than a corporate campus.

[flournoy]

I talked to apartment manager Connie this A.M., and she said the deal will close October 26. The historic 1930s apartments will be razed after the first of the year for the construction of ca. 20 luxury, single-family homes.

Fire-Eater,

Crestwood Place has many virtues: the park-like setting, the newer buildings that were designed to blend in with the older ones, the generous space between the buildings, and the affordable, attractive living quarters in an attractive neighborhood.

Regarding Dallas "deciders," I think that as recently as the 1980s (or is that ancient history?) a member of a Fort Worth family owned Crestwood Place. Right now I'm feeling very sad/defeatist about the doomed complex, but -- in considering some other current goings-on -- I could become a fire-eater, too.

[safly]

Other than CB. Was there anyone of GREAT IMPORTANCE that lived there or owned it? Poet, writer, actor, activist, bandit, bandito, singer or politician which would link CPA to our city's past???

If not, tear it down. I don't know of ANY historical SIGNIFICANCE. Yes, the lawn and buildings I am sure of are beautiful , but that is just not objective enough to reason a demo delay. Yes, the owners have/had NUMEROUS options which could feed into federal or state project funding, but it's ultimately up to THEM. Besides, it seems as though this place was NEVER even considerd to be HP designated at anytime ever before. So when you say you are TRULY PROACTIVE and never intended to act upon this designation before the news, then your loss. MOVE FORWARD.

[Fort Worthology]

If not, tear it down. I don't know of ANY historical SIGNIFICANCE. Yes, the lawn and buildings I am sure of are beautiful , but that is just not objective enough to reason a demo delay.

That is enough for me if they are unique enough in Fort Worth. I can't think of a similar pre-war apartment development with such a setting in Fort Worth (if there is another, I doubt it is as well preserved). Significance is not just about famous people who slept there, after all.

Yes, the owners have/had NUMEROUS options which could feed into federal or state project funding, but it's ultimately up to THEM. Besides, it seems as though this place was NEVER even considerd to be HP designated at anytime ever before. So when you say you are TRULY PROACTIVE and never intended to act upon this designation before the news, then your loss. MOVE FORWARD.

The reason why most people never acted upon the buildings before is probably that almost *nothing* in Fort Worth is protected, so it's hard to figure out where to start. We have done a terrible job protecting things around here.

[TxConnie]

Okay-- sorry-- my post meant to say I live in North Hi Mount, not love it, because I don't anymore. I moved here 16 years ago because of the unique, old neighborhood and now I am surrounded by McMansions. We will be one of the last to leave, I am sure. Granted, our property is worth 5 x what we bought it for 10 years ago (we rented the same house for the previous 6 years), but I don't want to move to the suburbs and can't afford to buy on this side of town.

Just sad. Those apartments were lovely. The old, big rooms with really neat touches-- absolutely a shame they are being torn down.

[safly]

In reply to AG. If the previous owners NEVER acted upon designating HP for their place, then why should your average FW resident care? If they received a fair market value offer on the sell, then it is their world not mine. If someone or group had tried to designate this area for HP, then shame on our local government for not taking it further, and thus I would FULLY support your argument. APPARENTLY, nobody gave a pigs poop about the place in terms of HP, and this is EXACTLY what happens.

Want to make a STRONG and SIGNIFICANT bit of difference regarding our city's lack of HP interest? Then SUPPORT and VOTE 4 BERNIE.

[vjackson]

I don't know where these statements about Crestwood being some sort of transiet-infested disaster area are coming from - the place has always seemed well-run and clean to me. I have heard nothing but great reviews from residents. It's not a blight at all.

I think you misread what I meant by "transient". I didn't mean bums or scary people. Just that apartment renters are able and tend to move more often than homeowners causing many people to feel renters are not "vested" in the neighborhood. Plus apartments tend to bring much more traffic and out-of-area visitors than single-family homes.
You might not see the apartment community as blight, but I know few homeowners who would choose an apartment complex to stay in their neighborhood instead of a community of higher priced single family homes.

[cbellomy]

vjackson, your point is well taken. However, Crestwood Place is the exception to the rule. Tenants there tend to be older than in most apartment complexes, and stay there longer. It also has been the home of many widows and widowers who no longer wanted the burdens of home ownership -- the dark joke there being that these tenants were staying at Crestwood until they'd be staying at Greenwood. (It was their joke, not mine.)

So, I don't disagree with you, except to say that CP wasn't your usual apartment complex.

[Fire-Eater]

In reply to AG. If the previous owners NEVER acted upon designating HP for their place, then why should your average FW resident care? If they received a fair market value offer on the sell, then it is their world not mine. If someone or group had tried to designate this area for HP, then shame on our local government for not taking it further, and thus I would FULLY support your argument. APPARENTLY, nobody gave a pigs poop about the place in terms of HP, and this is EXACTLY what happens.

Want to make a STRONG and SIGNIFICANT bit of difference regarding our city's lack of HP interest? Then SUPPORT and VOTE 4 BERNIE.

The main problem is that the City of Fort Worth has not, in the past, provided adequate funding to identify and designate historic properties. It should've been part of the city's planning process 30 years ago. Because the city has been woefully inadequate in this area, there's no reliable list that even begins to identify the vast(?) historic resources in this town. Therefore, most historic preservation activism in this community is reactive. When somebody decides to tear something down, people protest, and the owners get mad cause they didn't know their property's historic (or they did and they're playing dumb). It's difficult to be proactive, however, because there's been so little done by the City Council and Planning Dept. to work with what we have. In order to be proactive the properties must first be identified.

I've worked on extensive survey projects in which municipalities such as Amarillo; Enid, OK; Chickasha, OK; Raleigh, NC; and Fulton County, GA have conducted large blanket surveys to identify historic resources for planning purposes. Fort Worth needs to get with it.

The only planning I've seen come from the City of Fort Worth is their plan to hand over the city to developers for economic exploitation.

Make Planning & Preservation a Priority: Vote Bernie!

[Dr Quest]

I have friends that live in Crestwood Place. They had notice that everyone would need to be vacated by March 1, they estimated that approx 80% had moved out. Just got word today that demolition has been delayed for at least a year and thinks they are actually going to start renting again.

[cbellomy]

That's good news, Dr Quest. Maybe we can galvanize some community action to save the complex!

[DustinAskins]

Like some above, Crestwood was my first apartment here in Fort Worth. The grounds, the units, and the staff were all amazing. When I moved out I referred my brother-in-law and his fiance to Crestwood. They took up residence there for about a year before they received a letter telling them everyone had to be out by the end of December 2007. We were in disbelief.

I hope the red brick, the windows, and hardwood floors are all reclaimed and used in other projects. The only bit of hopeful info I have is that there were some men sent out to mark and identify trees that should be kept and a number of them were marked. That's just a rumor from some of the residents though, supposedly you can walk the grounds and see the marked trees. It would be so sad to see more of those trees go. When I lived there I talked to an older resident who said there used to be even more trees on the grounds, but the 2000 tornado tore a number of them down.

I drove by the other day and from what I can tell the front two buildings are vacant, but there are still residents towards the back. If they do start renting again I have a friend who wouldn't mind living there. I'll have to call and get my name on a call-back list in case they start leasing.

RIP Crestwood


(cross-posted from a thread I started before knowing about this one)

[Fire-Eater]

That's good news, Dr Quest. Maybe we can galvanize some community action to save the complex!

If you want to save Crestwood Apartments and other significant historic buildings in FW, you need to lobby City Council to locally designate these resources with historic zoning protection as afforded by the city's Historic Preservation Ordinance. Also, JOIN Historic Fort Worth, Inc.

City Council won't pay much attention to you, though, unless you're a developer. HECK, they won't even historically-designate city-owned historic properties!!!

FW is a very UNhistoric preservation town, generally speaking. There are some wonderful success stories and some heroic individuals in this town who have saved some real treasures. Mostly, though, it's a laissez-faire bulldoze-make-a-buck "best"-use real-estate exploitation with no consideration of FW's architecture and history. And, what, I think we've been through three City historic preservation planners in seven years? Now that's GOTTA be a frustrating job!

[John T Roberts]

Fire-Eater, it is actually 6 City Historic Preservation Officers in 6 years.

[courtnie]

Hi all,

I grew up in Crestwood and am a preservationist. I hate the idea that they are tearing down those apartments and will replace them with more massive houses that ruin the look of the area. I hate to see all of the houses I have known all of my life gone just gone in a matter of days, you think im kidding?? with in the course of 1 week 3 houses were torn down in crestwood and twoof those were right next to eachother and with in 3 days there is a mcmansion in their place with a 3 car garage. Those houses over there are so unique in the fact that they are over 60 yrs old and survived the flood of 1949. One by one they are being picked off until there will be NOTHING left of crestwood. I dont mind progress but not when its in the name of destroying history im against it. Its just my opinion. On another note pertaining to the crestwood apartments,does anyone know what will become of all of the windows and fixtures? do you think they will auction them off.

[Fire-Eater]

Hi all,

I grew up in Crestwood and am a preservationist. I hate the idea that they are tearing down those apartments and will replace them with more massive houses that ruin the look of the area.

My condolences. Don't you wish those people would build their suburban houses in the suburbs and not in historic intown neighborhoods?

I started a thread on North Hi Mount, which is going the same way. Monticello will probably escape a complete rebuild because the housing is a little pricier.

One of last week's Morning News highlighted Dallas' intown neighborhoods and the battle over design overlays, which serve to restrict tear-downs.

[courtnie]

I guess I am a bit late in saying this but to me I would rather look at those old familiar 30's apartments to remind us of our past, where we have been and how well built they are that they are still around and still retain their charm and beauty then 20 more monster mansions that just keep running our taxes up for those of us who live in Crestwood and own a smaller, quaint house. and the quote earlier in the thread about just because something is old doesnt make it historic, I dont agree because I think everything that is built over time lends something to our history, As John has said many times they wanted to tear down the court house to build something more modern for the time, and now since that has been almost 30 yrs ago it would now be outdated and ugly and they would probably have regetted tearing down the one we currently have and would of started and campaign to rebuild the courthouse. What im saying is, that each building that is built lends something to the next and the next. By still having these buildings around we can connect with our ancestors and get a better glimpse into their daily lives. Just like the stock yards, if some one decided they had outlived their usefulness and torn them all down we would loose that old west charm, you cannot recreate that, you can build something that looks just like the original but its still a copy. They can build 20 more houses for the uber rich because the houses in Idlewild sell for 1.2 million and up but you will loose the charm that was once there, same with the houses in crestwood, you get the monster mansion but you loose the 40's bungalow. Im a preservationist to a fault, so you will have to forgive my rant..

[McHand]

courtnie, I agree completely. Just because those apartments were apartments and not some grand old mansion doesn't mean they're not historic, because no one builds apartments like that anymore. Old neighborhoods, even if they have smaller homes and especially if they were built before WWII deserve special consideration simply because they contain architectural styles we don't see in new developments. I guess what I'm trying to say is preservation shouldn't have to be reserved for grand buildings.

[McHand]

courtnie, I agree completely. Just because those apartments were apartments and not some grand old mansion doesn't mean they're not historic, because no one builds apartments like that anymore. Old neighborhoods, even if they have smaller homes and especially if they were built before WWII deserve special consideration simply because they contain architectural styles we don't see in new developments. I guess what I'm trying to say is preservation shouldn't have to be reserved for grand buildings.

Let me clarify: Obviously apartments are built these days that have excellent design elements but these tend to be much higher-end, where preserving a place like Crestwood Apts. provides a more affordable alternative for those who appreciate elements of design and urban living as a whole.

[Stadtplan]

https://www.tdlr.tex.../TABS2022010077

 

PROJECT

Project Name: Crestwood Place Apartments

Project Number: TABS2022010077

Facility Name: Clubhouse Location Address:

3900 White Settlement Rd

Fort Worth, TX 76107

Location County: Tarrant

Start Date: 5/1/2022

Completion Date: 11/1/2023

Estimated Cost: $600,000

Type of Work: New Construction

Type of Funds: This project is privately funded, on private land for private use.

Scope of Work: Review of clubhouse for apartment building.

Square Footage: 10,500 ft 2

Are the private funds provided by the tenant? No

 

OWNER

Owner Name:

Highwater Equity

Owner Address:

1400 Ravello Dr, Ste. N110 Katy, TX 77449

Katy, Texas 77449

 

DESIGN FIRM

Design Firm Name:

Heiser Development Corp

Design Firm Address:

901 S Mopac, Bldg 2, ste 505

Austin, Texas 78746

[Austin55]

As an aside, I'm really glad this neighborhood was never demolished.

[John T Roberts]

I agree.  These are nice historic apartment buildings.