Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

User avatar
jrd1964
Posts: 390
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 06:38

Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby jrd1964 » 12 Mar 2017 09:26

20170310_143934a.jpg

20170310_143911a.jpg


The lot in the pictures (Malcolm X/Louise) was being fenced Friday in advance of demolition. I saw this while at a class at the CitySquare complex across the street. I'd heard that CitySquare had acquired the old gas station some time ago but I didn't hear what would be done with the lot. Since the new fence surrounds the station and the 2 boarded up houses I'm guessing CitySquare acquired those as well. I couldn't figure out what they would do with just the gas station, but with the acreage that includes the 2 houses, it may be clearer as to what's going on. Since this lot is so close to the Cottages area just to the north, my guess would be space for more cottages. It's sad to see more history going away (the gas station has to date to the 1920s or 1930s) but if CitySquare is involved it should be better in the long run than a trashed-out/vacant lot.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
ArtVandelay
Posts: 194
Joined: 01 Nov 2016 12:44

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby ArtVandelay » 14 Mar 2017 06:12

I would argue the exact opposite is true. CitySquare squandered lots of money in the Cottages project. You can build a three bedroom house for what it cost them to build one cottage (nothing but a pre fab looking Shed). I believe each unit cost around $160,000.

User avatar
jrd1964
Posts: 390
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 06:38

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby jrd1964 » 14 Mar 2017 13:01

ArtVandelay wrote:I would argue the exact opposite is true. CitySquare squandered lots of money in the Cottages project. You can build a three bedroom house for what it cost them to build one cottage (nothing but a pre fab looking Shed). I believe each unit cost around $160,000.


Wow, I didn't realize that.

User avatar
NdoorTX
Posts: 178
Joined: 21 Nov 2016 02:27

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby NdoorTX » 14 Mar 2017 19:11

not that this "Pink Palace" is an architectural gem in any way, but Mary Kay Ash's former home is being torn down today to make way for another mansion. It's no surprise as the house has no no real architectural value in it's outdated nouveau classic design. (I'm glad patrons have embraced a more true version of a classical house- or at least of those built in the teens and 20's of the 20th century). It was though, the home of a former Dallasite with some world renown. This is truly a city with no regard for it's past.

http://candysdirt.com/2017/03/14/mary-k ... -dust-r-p/

MAryKAy.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
dukemeredith
Posts: 291
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:17
Location: Downtown Dallas

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby dukemeredith » 14 Mar 2017 20:21

NdoorTX wrote:not that this "Pink Palace" is an architectural gem in any way, but Mary Kay Ash's former home is being torn down today to make way for another mansion. It's no surprise as the house has no no real architectural value in it's outdated nouveau classic design. (I'm glad patrons have embraced a more true version of a classical house- or at least of those built in the teens and 20's of the 20th century). It was though, the home of a former Dallasite with some world renown. This is truly a city with no regard for it's past.

http://candysdirt.com/2017/03/14/mary-k ... -dust-r-p/

MAryKAy.jpg


So you concede that the building itself holds no architectural significant. You grant that it's outdated, and state your pleasure that others have better taste.

But simply because the home was owned by someone famous, its demolition is further proof that Dallas has "no regard for it's (sic) past?"

User avatar
NdoorTX
Posts: 178
Joined: 21 Nov 2016 02:27

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby NdoorTX » 14 Mar 2017 23:06

yep ^. I'm not saddened by it. I had a feeling it would go down after languishing for years on the market and taking price chop after price chop. I'd rather see a Larry Boerder or Wilson Fuqua home there anyday.

I do lament when truly architecturally significant structures are torn down- whether a Hal Thompson or O'Neill Ford. Or whether it be residential or public. I didn't expect the house to be kept as a shrine to Mary Kay Ash. I would argue some structures hold historical significance by a former owner (Mount Vernon) or past events (former Dallas Police HQ). That to me is more important than fame when speaking of preservation. I should have made a clearer statement about how I felt about this teardown. I wasn't going to tie myself to a tree to stop it. It was though- an accurate comment on how many people feel about preservation of any kind in Dallas. Age, historical significance, architectural importance- it's all fair game in Dallas.

User avatar
Tivo_Kenevil
Posts: 1371
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 12:24

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby Tivo_Kenevil » 14 Mar 2017 23:59

NdoorTX wrote:yep ^. I'm not saddened by it. I had a feeling it would go down after languishing for years on the market and taking price chop after price chop. I'd rather see a Larry Boerder or Wilson Fuqua home there anyday.

I do lament when truly architecturally significant structures are torn down- whether a Hal Thompson or O'Neill Ford. Or whether it be residential or public. I didn't expect the house to be kept as a shrine to Mary Kay Ash. I would argue some structures hold historical significance by a former owner (Mount Vernon) or past events (former Dallas Police HQ). That to me is more important than fame when speaking of preservation. I should have made a clearer statement about how I felt about this teardown. I wasn't going to tie myself to a tree to stop it. It was though- an accurate comment on how many people feel about preservation of any kind in Dallas. Age, historical significance, architectural importance- it's all fair game in Dallas.


Ive always felt that Dallas Preservationists lament things being torn down that the general public really doesn't consider Historic nor Archictecturally significant. It "almost" seems like that they'll try to preserve anything that is old.. which IMO isn't an automatic qualifier as to what deserves to be preserved... The preservation of things like the Lakewood theatre that have been Staples in Neighborhoods and carry some local history deserve to be considered historic in my eyes.

However, there are some times where I can't help but feel that people use the preservation agenda to prevent change...Which isn't a good thing in most cases when talking about City Growth. I recall reading a Robert Wilsonksy story on DMN from last year. In the story it was mentioned that people were worried that an old house on Gaston was going to get torn down and in place townhomes were to be built there.

The house in question is in a area I'm very familiar with just FYI... I had always thought that specific corner was in desperate need of redevelopment.

In the story, it was reported that it was owned by some Dallas Businessman in the early 1900's or so. After reading the story, I asked myself...who actually knows who this guy was? He isn't exactly renowned, or celebrated in the community.. If this house is historic or important as some seem to think it is... Why has it been a complete dump..For literally my entire life?..The entire notion that a private property that once was owned by a wealthy person makes it more historic than lets say a home owned by you or me ,in the same Neighborhood, just is real stretch to me.. Regardless if it's a mansion or not.

After reflection, I thought the new Townhomes would add more value to the community; as it would help bring in new families to area and maybe help the area improve. I don't know what happened after that as I still see the house on the corner... Still a dump.. just sitting there.

Sometimes letting things go is the best thing to do. Don't get me wrong, I believe it's important to save Historic buildings. However I feel the " it deserves to be Historic" consideration is thrown out ever so easily in this town when trying to save buildings.

I feel the same about the house mentioned in this story. This was a private property that just so happened be owned by a successful person. I don't think this house's existence is something important to the community nor did anything of historical importance occur there. I don't think most people know or care about this building.. so why lament it?


Just my thoughts...

User avatar
The_Overdog
Posts: 427
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 14:55

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby The_Overdog » 15 Mar 2017 09:42

After reading the story, I asked myself...who actually knows who this guy was? He isn't exactly renowned, or celebrated in the community..


Dallas could bump up its historical appreciation of local business leaders and war leaders with something like a statue garden as our state historical markers are kind of discombobulated all over the state. Put them in a downtown park and we'd have a unique amenity, and would be cool and easy to privately fund.

If you think back to history class and can remember minor historical figures like Patrick Henry and the Green Mountain boys, then a remembrance of local heroes makes sense and just needs a bit of local marketing.

itsjrd1964
Posts: 623
Joined: 28 Jul 2018 07:38

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby itsjrd1964 » 19 Nov 2018 14:51

Our Mr. Wilonsky wrote recently and longingly about yet another building about to, well, leave the building. The former Great National Life building (and local Salvation Army offices for a time as well) at Harry Hines/Mockingbird is about to call it a day. It dates to 1963, and has an unusual cladding that Robert lists as "brise-soleil". A new building for The Freeman Co. will occupy the space after the demo. They claim they will try to retain some of the facade in some way, but as with other developers and projects around here, the promises-in-advance are best left in the know-it-when-you-see-it file.

https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/comm ... demolished

User avatar
Matt777
Posts: 666
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 09:10

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby Matt777 » 19 Nov 2018 15:38

Ugh. It's like any older building with some level of architectural finesse in this city has a huge target on it for bulldozers, while insignificant buildings get a free pass. I can already imagine in my mind the boring, safe, glass and EIFS box that Freeman has in mind for the site of this beautiful structure.

Tnexster
Posts: 2139
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby Tnexster » 20 Nov 2018 14:24

Matt777 wrote:Ugh. It's like any older building with some level of architectural finesse in this city has a huge target on it for bulldozers, while insignificant buildings get a free pass. I can already imagine in my mind the boring, safe, glass and EIFS box that Freeman has in mind for the site of this beautiful structure.


No worries...they assured us a "architecturally significant building"...whatever that actually means.

User avatar
Matt777
Posts: 666
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 09:10

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby Matt777 » 20 Nov 2018 15:02

Tnexster wrote:
Matt777 wrote:Ugh. It's like any older building with some level of architectural finesse in this city has a huge target on it for bulldozers, while insignificant buildings get a free pass. I can already imagine in my mind the boring, safe, glass and EIFS box that Freeman has in mind for the site of this beautiful structure.


No worries...they assured us a "architecturally significant building"...whatever that actually means.


Probably something like this:

Image

User avatar
NdoorTX
Posts: 178
Joined: 21 Nov 2016 02:27

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby NdoorTX » 21 Apr 2019 10:16

It’s gone. Totally. Not a single bit saved- unless the brise soleils were carted away & stored somewhere.
CF1AA72D-FF07-4421-8293-D7708F9FA4E0.jpeg


68C44CE4-1182-49AF-9C69-8D837F108A4E.jpeg


15427A85-CD90-48B8-BF9F-CEAF088F427F.jpeg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

itsjrd1964
Posts: 623
Joined: 28 Jul 2018 07:38

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby itsjrd1964 » 21 Apr 2019 13:54

So, what was this? I don't recognize it with just the trees.

User avatar
NdoorTX
Posts: 178
Joined: 21 Nov 2016 02:27

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby NdoorTX » 21 Apr 2019 19:10

itsjrd1964 wrote:So, what was this? I don't recognize it with just the trees.


Oh yeah, it's the Great National Life building, ( local Salvation Army). A mid-century jewel that will be replaced by an office building of unknown architectural integrity.

itsjrd1964
Posts: 623
Joined: 28 Jul 2018 07:38

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby itsjrd1964 » 22 Apr 2019 11:01

Well, I guess our Mr. Wilonsky did warn us about that one. At the rate we're going, the oldest thing in Dallas will be NorthPark.

User avatar
TNWE
Posts: 182
Joined: 03 May 2017 09:42

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby TNWE » 22 Apr 2019 11:37

itsjrd1964 wrote:Well, I guess our Mr. Wilonsky did warn us about that one. At the rate we're going, the oldest thing in Dallas will be NorthPark.



:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Perhaps the developer should have gotten this building designated as an Interstate Highway...then this forum would be ecstatic about demolishing it...

dfwcre8tive
Site Admin
Posts: 234
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:47
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby dfwcre8tive » 22 Apr 2019 17:18

itsjrd1964 wrote:So, what was this? I don't recognize it with just the trees.


Image

http://www.preservationtexas.org/endang ... -building/

User avatar
tamtagon
Site Admin
Posts: 1682
Joined: 16 Oct 2016 12:04

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby tamtagon » 22 Apr 2019 18:27

*sigh*

User avatar
muncien
Posts: 926
Joined: 25 Oct 2016 08:46
Location: Cypress Waters

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby muncien » 23 Apr 2019 08:41

That's actually a really good picture of it. Last time I saw it in person, it looked like hell.
I'm curious how much it was purchased for. I'm sure it wasn't for much at all. I know a LOT of these buildings that we see go down are acquired for extremely cheap (First Baptist purchased theirs for $1.1m I believe). Apparently, there isn't much stomach for developers, or even private investors for that matter, to rehab many of these structures.
"He doesn't know how to use the three seashells..."

User avatar
TNWE
Posts: 182
Joined: 03 May 2017 09:42

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby TNWE » 23 Apr 2019 15:25

muncien wrote:That's actually a really good picture of it. Last time I saw it in person, it looked like hell.
I'm curious how much it was purchased for. I'm sure it wasn't for much at all. I know a LOT of these buildings that we see go down are acquired for extremely cheap (First Baptist purchased theirs for $1.1m I believe). Apparently, there isn't much stomach for developers, or even private investors for that matter, to rehab many of these structures.


One need only look at the Drever or Statler to see that rehabbing/renovating old structures for modern uses is fraught with risk and expense. And as long as there's still open lots for development, a blanket "historical" designation on all buildings in Dallas over a certain age will just lead to lots of buildings over a certain age lying vacant.

dfwcre8tive
Site Admin
Posts: 234
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 12:47
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby dfwcre8tive » 23 Apr 2019 16:35

muncien wrote:That's actually a really good picture of it. Last time I saw it in person, it looked like hell.
I'm curious how much it was purchased for. I'm sure it wasn't for much at all. I know a LOT of these buildings that we see go down are acquired for extremely cheap (First Baptist purchased theirs for $1.1m I believe). Apparently, there isn't much stomach for developers, or even private investors for that matter, to rehab many of these structures.


Lots of these Midcentury Modern buildings are easy to forget about because the original landscaping (baby live oak trees, etc) have all grown up to obscure the architecture.

User avatar
Tivo_Kenevil
Posts: 1371
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 12:24

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby Tivo_Kenevil » 23 Apr 2019 21:16

Sadly Belmont hotel will be next

User avatar
ContriveDallasite
Posts: 269
Joined: 27 Oct 2016 03:34
Location: München

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby ContriveDallasite » 24 Apr 2019 01:53

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Sadly Belmont hotel will be next


I really hope that's not the case. That hotel is beautiful and should be protected, all it needs is new management.

User avatar
exelone31
Posts: 472
Joined: 31 Oct 2016 11:35

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby exelone31 » 24 Apr 2019 12:09

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Sadly Belmont hotel will be next


I really, really hope that doesn't happen, but have a fear that it might based off some of the recent articles that have come out.

User avatar
R1070
Posts: 702
Joined: 26 Oct 2016 21:00

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby R1070 » 28 Apr 2019 17:36

The small triangular building at McKinney & Akard looks to have metal poles in the ground for fencing to go up. Any idea what the plan is here?

User avatar
dzh
Posts: 37
Joined: 14 Dec 2016 20:24

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby dzh » 28 Apr 2019 22:17

R1070 wrote:The small triangular building at McKinney & Akard looks to have metal poles in the ground for fencing to go up. Any idea what the plan is here?



STK was supposed to open a location there. The Morning News even wrote about their intended move there (this was 2015 however). No idea if STK is finally going through (highly doubt it), but maybe a restaurant is finally moving in.

lakewoodhobo
Posts: 993
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:49
Location: Elmwood, Oak Cliff

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby lakewoodhobo » 29 Apr 2019 10:50

dzh wrote:
R1070 wrote:The small triangular building at McKinney & Akard looks to have metal poles in the ground for fencing to go up. Any idea what the plan is here?



STK was supposed to open a location there. The Morning News even wrote about their intended move there (this was 2015 however). No idea if STK is finally going through (highly doubt it), but maybe a restaurant is finally moving in.


Are we talking about the north corner that used to be Revive Douchepool Lounge or the south corner that's an office building (and originally a bookstore if I recall)?

User avatar
jetnd87
Posts: 73
Joined: 08 Jan 2019 16:00

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby jetnd87 » 29 Apr 2019 12:59

North corner, across from the (now vacant) Stampede 66 spot.

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 1873
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 29 Apr 2019 13:32

I've always just wished that plot could be better used as a plaza/park. I recognize Klyde Warren isn't far off but done right could be another fabulous gathering spot feeding off all the new residential and existing office space. I just don't see that site really working for much.

Obviously, any restaurant would have to be valet tied to some deal with a nearby parking garage since it's not likely to have enough onsite parking to make the price worth it when it comes to charging rent for office space. If SPACES were to assume control of that property I could see them setting it up as more office space for coworking rental.

User avatar
NdoorTX
Posts: 178
Joined: 21 Nov 2016 02:27

Re: Demolished (and about to be) Properties 2.0

Postby NdoorTX » 02 May 2019 19:47

C8454AE3-3B01-4E12-ADA3-4DFACFEB100C.jpeg


Doesn’t look like demo. I like this building, hopefully it gets a proper retrofit.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

Login