19 Responses to “Fort Worth Club to Demolish Former Star-Telegram Classifieds Building for Surface Parking Lot”

Comments

Read below or add a comment...

  1. What, those 6 full floors of garage in their own building isn’t enough for them? And what’s more, they’re actually going to make fancy people *cross two streets* in their fur coats / top hats to mingle amongst peers consuming $20 cocktails & french fries? :D

  2. The Fort Worth Club should really be ashamed of themselves. It’s not as though we don’t already have enough ugly surface parking lots in downtown. There’s no need to take down a perfectly good building for another ugly empty lots (and a pretty small parking lot at that).

  3. If someone wants to save a building for historical or nostalgic purposes they should purchase it. It’s my opinion that when it changes hands to a private party they can pretty well do whatever they like with it.
    Who knows what FWC’s long term plans are anyway. Often times a parking lot is just something functional while development plans are in a holding pattern. That, or it’s being looked at as a wise long term investment.

  4. Chris

    What they should tear down is that horrible ’70s addition on the west half of the FWC block.

  5. This is a real tragedy. I wonder if the Historical society or historical department of the City of FW are going to put up any resistance. The star-telegram never made an effort to make this beautiful building

  6. Neil Jones

    @Austin

    Maybe you’d like it better if they put in a XX Store, or maybe just a junk yard… I mean hey “private party they can pretty well do whatever they like with it.” right?

  7. Johnny

    I think the building is spectacularly ugly, and agree with Austin that once a building is purchased by a private party it should be able to do whatever it wants with it. Contrary to Neil’s comment that they might as well be allowed to “put in an XX store or maybe just a junkyard”, a zoning change for such a business would be denied.

    In that same line of thinking, however, why should any type of business be allowed or denied? Saving a building or justifying protecting it, just because it’s the lone example of an architectural style, does not make that the right and perfect argument against demolition.

    Right now you have an ugly and old building. The new parking lot will be functional, and like it or not, people are going to be driving cars into downtown for a very long time. They need a place to park. If the owner of the property feels he can make a profit from the lot, and the zoning allows for it, there is no reason to “protect” the building.

  8. It’s the only surviving building of its kind in downtown – that alone gives reason to protect it. And like it or not, not everybody thinks it is “spectacularly ugly.” After all, there are probably people out there that think the Tarrant County Courthouse is ugly – would you all be so happy about *that* being demolished for a parking lot? It’s just as unprotected as the Classifieds building. We are losing examples of this style of architecture left and right, and with this demolition, there won’t be anything left standing in downtown Fort Worth that represents a major movement of the region’s architectural heritage. The old-money types around here can’t think an inch outside the box to come up with a way re-use this perfectly good structure and preserve a piece of Fort Worth’s built history.

    Of course people are driving into downtown, but if we take the attitude that because of that, demolishing anything to replace it with surface parking is A-OK, after a while you’ll have removed a lot of what makes downtown special. Surface parking creates a dead space in the street, where this building, if restored and in use, creates activity. There are good ways and bad ways to integrate parking into downtown – just plowing down buildings to stick in parking lots is a good way to kill a downtown’s vitality.

    Despite our claims of “respecting our heritage,” the state of historic preservation in Fort Worth is actually pretty poor – and things like this are the result.

  9. Austin55

    I think we should all write hand written letters. I know I will be emailing and maybe even calling someone.

  10. I know the FW Club has property rights, and property rights are good, but you shouldn’t have complete disregard for the environment you’re working in. This is downtown, not the suburbs. We need density, not parking lots. Replacing buildings with parking lots (espcially buildings that are not even in disrepar. Maybe it’s ugly, maybe it’s not, but that’s not an issue), is just bad for everyone. It creates a dead space. And if you’re all about money, I think leasing the building as office/retail space will bring in a lot more money than a tiny little parking lot, because you’re not going to be able to fit many cars in the space where that building is.

  11. Jonathan

    Why don’t you lobby for a zoning change that prohibits surface parking to occupy more than 50% or 75% of a lot in areas zoned H (Central Business)? That would prohibit any further conversions of lots to surface parking.

  12. Dave

    The parking lot is just a place-holder. There are plans for redeveloping the site.

    The building is in need of major work. Each floor is only like 2400 SF and “chopped-up”. The cost to rehab the building and bring it up to current code is astronomical – the asbestos abatement alone is crazy. It is unfortunate the building is being lost, but the economics are very real and valid consideration.

  13. Austin55

    Has the building atleast been well documented in pictures?

  14. Johnny Bratton

    The building’s owners can do what they want, so it does not matter what any preservationist thinks is a smarter alternative. Not everyone considers the building attractive so the reality is it will probably become a parking lot. A parking lot is functional and serves a purpose, and will generate income whereas if the building remains as is, it will likely sit and continue to rot. Like it or not capitalism rules because this is America where a man buy a building, and yes, tear it down, and do with his property as he pleases.

    Also, leaving the building to continue to rot in its current condition would be the real definition of powerfully lame. There is no market for a small, old, building but if the preservationists really want to protect it then BUY IT. Other than that, progress is indeed a parking lot and I for one and happy about that.

  15. So, again, you’d be OK with demolishing the Tarrant County Courthouse, since not everybody out there thinks it is attractive? If Tarrant County wanted to demolish the courthouse for a parking lot, since there’s no designation on that building as well, then you’re fine with that?

    We as a society have already said that no, a man *can’t* do anything he wants with his property, through zoning and such. If one really wants to do “whatever” with their property, I’d suggest moving out to the middle of nowhere. If the Fort Worth Club wanted to build a toxic waste disposal plant on the site, would you be OK with that, too? Or if your neighbor wanted to build one next to you?

    This isn’t a suburban strip mall in Burleson or Mansfield or Arlington and it’s not a ranch in the wilderness – it’s the middle of downtown Fort Worth. Parking lots are detrimental to the fabric of downtown. The “demolish, pave a parking lot, because everybody needs to drive” mentality is what helped decimate other cities. That might be progress to you, but it ain’t to everybody. Progress in Downtown is the creation of things that improve the fabric and built environment – so no, a parking lot isn’t progress. If you tear down enough buildings to build parking lots, pretty soon you’ve removed the reasons people like being in a downtown in the first place. Downtown is not the suburbs and shouldn’t try to be.

    I’d suggest that if the Fort Worth Club wants a building surrounded by expanses of parking, perhaps they should reconsider being in downtown in the first place. The suburbs would be a better place for them to be in that case.

  16. We have no use for smaller buildings in downtown? Well, I guess we better bulldoze the Bryce Building, the Sanger Buidling, the building that houses Reata, the Courthouse (it’s only 3 or 4 stories, right?), the building that houses Kinko’s, the building where Del Frisco is, the Ashton and anything else under 10 stories.

    Downtown is not just for skyscrapers. Some of the best cities in the world have modest skylines (like Portland, OR). We need more buildings of all sizes with mixes uses and fewer surface lots. Like Kevin said, if the FW Club wants a ton of parking, maybe they should move to the suburbs.

  17. Brian Luenser

    I would really miss the building. Nobody can deny it is a “One Of”

    I don’t think there is any saving the building. I heard how much they paid for the place and It was a lot. A LOT. My guess is that any suggestions of saving it should have been brought to the Star Telegram people as they were selling it. Once a guy spends a billion on an old place they are sure going to think it is theirs to do as they please.

    I am disappointed in the Fort Worth Club for not having a greater sense of Fort Worth’s past.

  18. Brian, I am with you.

    I’m not too surprised by the FW Club. They did tear down the gorgeous Worth Hotel & Theater to build an ugly pressed gravel parking garage. I guess they’re not big on preservation or good architecture these days.

  19. Austin55

    the biggest problem is how dilapidated the building already is. If we don’t let buildings fall apart in the first place this wouldent be happining. “Fort Worth Club”, what a fail at being a good name for the city.