Downtown Dallas: Butler Brothers Building

[willyk]

I never thought I would say this but I am getting used to the color. It's a throwback to days of appliances in harvest gold and avocado, and gives the whole building a retro feeling that fits it into the Statler era.

http://retrorenovation.com/2012/02/15/retro-kitchen-colors-like-harvest-gold-avocado-poppy-and-orange-in-fridges-and-stoves-from-viking/

[Tivo_Kenevil]

Are they still working on that hideous parking structure... I'm wondering if Turkish mike will do something about the aesthetics..

[cowboyeagle05]

They are still working on all parts of the Butler Brothers building as well as Alto 211. You should see some exterior work done to Alto 211 by the end of the year. Nothing that infringes on the historical classification of course. As for Butler they are focusing on getting the retail spaces and hotel going while they lease apartments. I believe they are not finished with all the apartments but they have plenty to focus on leasing at this time.

[ArtVandelay]

Per Marriott website:

Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott Dallas Downtown opening March 2017
9 floors, 105 rooms, 37 suites

TownePlace Suites by Marriott Dallas Downtown opening March 2017
9 floors, 132 suites

Restaurants and Lounges:
Motopia
Mademoiselle Collete's

[Tnexster]

Lots of new hotels opening in 2017

[Tucy]

Per Marriott website:

Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott Dallas Downtown opening March 2017
9 floors, 105 rooms, 37 suites

TownePlace Suites by Marriott Dallas Downtown opening March 2017
9 floors, 132 suites

Restaurants and Lounges:
Motopia
Mademoiselle Collete's

Marriott site now shows May 2017 opening.

Has Motopia opened yet?

Any updates on Mademoiselle Collete's? I can't find any mention of it on the Butler Bros. Building website.

[kingpin]

1/2/17

Untitled by Around My City, on Flickr
Untitled by Around My City, on Flickr
Untitled by Around My City, on Flickr
Untitled by Around My City, on Flickr

[mdg109]

I wonder if they'll put signage on that small top tower.

[DallasMan]

The Preservation Dallas Young Professionals (PDYP) are touring the Butler Bros. Building on Wed., Feb. 22: https://www.facebook.com/events/272261403203537/

[xen0blue]

Ugly as the day it was renovated in the 60s

[ContriveDallasite]

Ugly as the day it was renovated in the 60s

Looks the same as half the shit in uptown, except made with concrete.

[xen0blue]

Ugly as the day it was renovated in the 60s

Looks the same as half the shit in uptown, except made with concrete.

Not even close, buddy. But I see your point.

[willyk]

I am sure the investors and residents will be very happy.

[dfwcre8tive]

[dfwcre8tive]

For reference, here's the original "after renovation" proposal:

[joshua.dodd]

Maybe in the future an investor will come along with interest in restoring it to its original facade. . .

[muncien]

Something as simple as a better choice in paint color could have gone a long ways. Oh, well...

[Tivo_Kenevil]

Something as simple as a better choice in paint color could have gone a long ways. Oh, well...

They couldn't change it since they applied for historical tax credits. They had to restore the ugly 60s version given that saving the brick façade was determined unfeasible

[cowboyeagle05]

Something as simple as a better choice in paint color could have gone a long ways. Oh, well...

They couldn't change it since they applied for historical tax credits. They had to restore the ugly 60s version given that saving the brick façade was determined unfeasible

yes.

[muncien]

Something as simple as a better choice in paint color could have gone a long ways. Oh, well...

They couldn't change it since they applied for historical tax credits. They had to restore the ugly 60s version given that saving the brick façade was determined unfeasible

Oh, right... That sounds familiar. We are our own worse enemy sometimes. haha For the sake of History! For my next trick... I'll restore my 85 Chevy Sprint; 3 cylinder rear engine and all!

[mdg109]

I hadn't realized how much of the upper windows were covered up by the facade.

[DBadger]

Couldn't the window arches be re-cut while maintaining the stucco?
It does seem that would have conflicted with the brick exposing issue.
I agree, that would have made a big difference even with this paint color.
Still, an active, occupied building beats a vacant one.

[cowboyeagle05]

The historical commission is quite the force when it comes to these things. They show up to tell you what they allow and won't and you have to abide. For example, the windows on the ground level that provide light to the basement aren't historically accurate. Without the windows, the basement is very unattractive to leases and this is where all the ground floor businesses are located; Motopia, Dev Mountain, a few more I can not list here and the leasing office with building amenities.

[DBadger]

I'm sure it is. But if the argument is to change the first floor windows because they are not historically accurate, why wouldn't the same argument be made to the top arches to make them historically accurate? As you can see from the picture, they are patched up while the original architecture still has the arch.
I think if the developer wanted to change the top windows, the argument could have been made about the appeal of the building and how rentable the space would be.
I think the main factor was cost. Everything in this building down to the electric conduits are the cheapest you can do. Again, I appreciate the transformation to a viable building, I really do, but if you are taking money, you have to answer to the quality of your end product.
This is already done, great. But the conversation needs to take place for future restorations specially with this developer.

[DBadger]

Were the historical commission recommendations made public? Or is that what the developer is saying? I apologize if it was already posted, I haven't seen it.

[ArtVandelay]

Were the historical commission recommendations made public? Or is that what the developer is saying? I apologize if it was already posted, I haven't seen it.

Although there probably is some truth to the usage of historic preservation tax credits preventing the developer from radically changing the appearance of the building the reason it's being restored to its 1960s look is because of money. It was going to cost him too much to strip the stucco and chevron panels and restore the original brickwork. Many on this board don't like the criticism of the look because what he's done is better than a a vacant building wasting away as it was.

If you look at the 511 Building - the developer doesn't do the details very well. The outside of the building hasn't been finished. And the exterior lights on the Butler Bros. building with the exposed conduit is down right laughable. Most of my architect friends say it's an aberration.

To answer your question there were no Landmark Commission proceedings because the building has neither landmark status or is located in a landmark/conservation district.

[ArtVandelay]

Here's a link to the project with the State Historic Tax Credit program:
http://www.thc.texas.gov/content/tax-cr ... s-building

[DallasMan]

This quote from the THC report echoes what the developer has said about the restoration of the exterior:

"It was hoped that the exterior of the building could be fully restored, but the original brick was highly damaged during the installation of the stucco coating and would have been further damaged during the removal, so the stucco was retained."

[gshelton91]

/\ I love historic buildings but frankly at the point it was deemed too damaging to the building to restore it to the original i would rather have seen it demolished. What we have now is just as ugly as it was before and will do little for the street life.

[joshua.dodd]

I agree, I'd rather see this building demolished and something better built in its place.

[Thymant]

/\ I love historic buildings but frankly at the point it was deemed too damaging to the building to restore it to the original i would rather have seen it demolished. What we have now is just as ugly as it was before and will do little for the street life.

But we know that more than likely if this had been demolished it would have sat as a surface lot for at least a decade with developers proposing grand plans for the site that never come to fruition just like Spire.

[The_Overdog]

I get that taste is a subjective thing, but bulldoze it? There are like 10 parking lots around this building. It's basically the only building in this little corner of Dallas downtown. If you bulldozed it, nothing would be there. Fill in the parking lots first, and then we can talk about how attractive buildings are.

What needs to happen is Marilla street needs to be condemned because it was obviously designed as a cut-through (including cutting through a park), destroyed the street grid, and would open up more odd shaped plots for normal development. So maybe this corner of downtown wouldn't be so awful. They can also shrink that plaza in front of city hall because this part of Dallas is nowhere dense enough to require a giant plaza next to parks in front and back of City Hall, and city services should be spread around the city and Dallas does not need a city hall expansion.

[cowboyeagle05]

/\ I love historic buildings but frankly at the point it was deemed too damaging to the building to restore it to the original i would rather have seen it demolished. What we have now is just as ugly as it was before and will do little for the street life.

I am confused so your prime focus is on street life activation yet the building is filling up with residents, office workers, soon hotel guests and even sooner multiple restaurants/retail that serves the neighborhood and not just destination style restaurants targeting Frisco clientele. I fail to see how the building that currently stands can not serve the function you speak of even if you disagree with the developers approach to that problem in the style they moved ahead with. I yet to see how butter yellow paint is worse than a parking lot which it would be without the building remaining.

Do I wish that the building could be restored yes do I wish investors could throw money just to make the building look prettier when it wouldn't make it function any better that the current plan. Do I wish the city would allow Mike to activate the plaza across the street to contribute to street level activation, yes.

Yet here we are in reality not the urban utopia rendering world many developers submit to city councils with endless empty promises. No we live here with real limitations on money, function and market demands and answers.

[willyk]

Not everybody can afford Uptown. In an admittedly unscientific survey I note that apartments in Butler Bros are going for about $200/ft/mo. Apartments in the Jordan are going for $300/ft/mo.

If this building were torn down and rebuilt to its highest and best, it would look something like the Jordan and guess where rents would be?

Downtown needs some lower cost renovations like this one so that Downtown is accessible to multiple demographics, not just the highest of the high earners.

I am glad for all of the people who will find a great home here that they couldn't touch in the pricier neighborhoods.

[Hannibal Lecter]

What needs to happen is Marilla street needs to be condemned because it was obviously designed as a cut-through (including cutting through a park), destroyed the street grid, and would open up more odd shaped plots for normal development.

You want to condemn one of the most historic streets in Dallas?

[The_Overdog]

You want to condemn one of the most historic streets in Dallas?

Yes. BTW, since you didn't specify and in case anyone is interested, Marilla Street was named after Young's (street- William C Young) wife, and is a pretty old street. One of the other old streets, Prather, is only one block between Jackson & Commerce so there is precedent for handling historical streets that are no longer useful.

[Jbarn]

/\ I love historic buildings but frankly at the point it was deemed too damaging to the building to restore it to the original i would rather have seen it demolished. What we have now is just as ugly as it was before and will do little for the street life.

But we know that more than likely if this had been demolished it would have sat as a surface lot for at least a decade with developers proposing grand plans for the site that never come to fruition just like Spire.

Amen. Let's be thankful for what we got. Much better than a huge empty lot or a parking lot for many years. That happens way too much in Dallas.

[gshelton91]

I don't agree that it is a forgone conclusion that it would have become a parking lot. This project only happened because the city gave them a significant amount of money to restore the building and make it useful. If they had shown the building as it is today I don't believe the city would have given them near as much money. I think the money could have been better spent somewhere else in Downtown.

[tamtagon]

After a while, it'll get a nice paint job, and that'll make a huge difference. I'd like for this building to light up at night by projection. With all those fin-thingies I bet it could look really happin, in a far out way.

[Tucy]

The projected opening of the hotels has now slipped to October 2017. I wonder when Marriott will pull the plug on these?

[DallasMan]

They added some nice planters with plants along Ervay, but what they really need is some trees in the sidewalk. The sidewalk is plenty wide here to accommodate trees.

[ArtVandelay]

They added some nice planters with plants along Ervay, but what they really need is some trees in the sidewalk. The sidewalk is plenty wide here to accommodate trees.

I thought it was crazy the City didn't require landscaping. I guess the area was so neglected nobody every thought a PD requiring landscaping was worth enacting. Young Street is a wasteland of concrete.

[lakewoodhobo]

They added some nice planters with plants along Ervay, but what they really need is some trees in the sidewalk. The sidewalk is plenty wide here to accommodate trees.

Yet another broken promise.

[exelone31]

I think that they had every intention of putting in trees, but when they tried to dig up the sidewalk to plant them, they found it to but much more cost-prohibitive than anticipated. Instead, they considered taking the next best approach and painting the sidewalk beige. Blame it on the price of oil.

[ArtVandelay]

I think that they had every intention of putting in trees, but when they tried to dig up the sidewalk to plant them, they found it to but much more cost-prohibitive than anticipated. Instead, they considered taking the next best approach and painting the sidewalk beige. Blame it on the price of oil.

Watch the sarcasm. You may offend Turkish Mike's fan club.

I've always said I'll believe the Marriott when I see a sign go up.

My wife who typically has no opinion on architecture made a comment on how ugly the parking structure is. I just laughed.

[Tivo_Kenevil]

I passed by this afternoon. So ugly

[rasec33]

Paint it Dark and I think it will make a big difference!

[willyk]

Paint it Dark and I think it will make a big difference!

Or scrims like the Miro did.

[Tnexster]

Downtown Dallas landmark redevelopment gets $23.9 million energy loan

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/rea ... nergy-loan

It's the largest such clean energy program loan ever made in Texas and second largest in nation, according to law firm Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr PC that arranged the transaction.

"This specific loan will aid in constructing energy-efficient systems and implementing water reduction technology," the law firm said in a statement. "The updates will improve the property value and enable the owner of the project to lower the overall first lien loan for the project."

The 9-story Butler Brothers Building when redevelopment is finished will have 238 apartments; a 270-room dual-branded Fairfield Inn/Town Home Suites by Marriott, retail and office space.

[ContriveDallasite]

Wow, somehow he just keeps getting money.