Maybe I am old fashioned but if I owned an old dilapidated building, would it not be MY responsibility to tear it down if it needed to be? Why is there no mention of the old owner? And how/why did it become the responsibility of the taxpayers to tear down an old building? And quite frankly, why do so? Is it in danger of collapsing and killing people? Or is it just old and ugly? Is anyone else asking these somewhat basic questions? (Good post)

It's like a very smart man once said.

"You get what you accept"

Welcome aboard, Os.....can I call you Os?

Good recruiting Nat, and given what I know you are paying it appears to be a really, really good investment.

Ospurt - Believe it or not, my life is so void of entertainment, I thought of something for this old building last night. Instead of tearing it down to create a parking lot, why not take the teardown monies and redo the first couple of floors? I think there is/was a cafeteria in there. Why not remodel it into a retro-1950's style cafeteria? There could be old pictures of Midland on the wall, etc. It could actually be the beginnings of the downtown "revitalization".

The use of monies this way seems much more productive than simply tearing it down. Frankly, being a native Midlander, I am tired of Midland tearing down our history - even if some do consider it "ugly".

personally, I don't like that they are so hell bent on tearing it down either. It isn't the grandest ediface of all time, but neither are 90% of the downtown buildings when it comes to architectural merit. But theis building is blue-how cool is that? Apparently people don't like blue buildings, as the old Commercial Bank building on Andrews Hwy is also empty. None the less, I have floated this one out there several times: take the buildng, clean it up, remove the asbestos, basically gutting each floor in the process, and turn it into a studio-art space, provide open gallery/studio spaces at low cost to area artists and perhaps a few from out f the area who could be lured to set up shop here. Artist would love a huge empty space lined with windows. Build out a few areas for non-profit art related organizations to set up shop, and renovate the ground floor for potential retail etc... Let what's going on inside be reflected to some degree on the outside. With all the groups that could utilize, and take part in making this work - public and private schools MC UTPB Arts Assembly clubs etc, I think it is feasible. The key is no build out, just let the artists use the shell, the placeouwld take on a new life, and I think become a local attraction.
oops..
I just lost one of my rose colored contacts.. got to go

I like the pic. I wouldn't say Midland Savings is the worst building in downtown, but it isn't the best either. If you ask me, Midland Savings was a combination of an owner who wanted to reduce his Downtown Portfolio (see recent downtown auctions) and a couple of quasi-governmental entities (MMD & TIRZ) with collected taxes and fees, but nothing to show from their collections.

In just think there is no LEADERSHIP in downtown. By leadership, I don't mean the City or some quasi-governmental board. I mean a local hands on developer with some cold hard private cash and a heart for Midland.

Sadly enough, the downtown ownership has created this leadership vacuum. I mean Leona Helmsley owned Midland Savings for a while, and most of our buildings are owned by California interests who seem happy just to say they own a sky-scraper like it's a bauble. I had hopes when Clatie and Bushman bought into downtown, but they have become rather low profile or have divested.

All the above ideas are worthy of consideration, but we have reached the point of no return. The politicos have decided they must do "something". This almost NEVER turns out good.

When Midland Savings WAS still Midland Savings, and the building was new, there was one wall, on the North side of the first floor, that was painted in a huge mural, sort of 30's style, of Midland and surrounds.....does anyone know if it still exists? I haven't been in the building since the cafeteria was still serving.
I think Bob's ideas are great.....has anyone seen the Torpedo Factory in Alexandria, VA?

The Torpedo Factory looks like a great example of something that could be done here-looks like a really neat place.

It would be better than a parking lot. It might not cost any more than a parking lot.

Another thing, small, but worth mentioning, is that the East side of the adjacent building is the back side of that building. It isn't all that attractive either. Do they tear it down next?

whooooweeeee ...... thats the largest tator I've ever seen in my life!
One problem with making MSB an art commune, there's no money in it .... the clean up costs for abestos could never be recovered. On another note the building is just weird with 7 ft ceilings and if you are working on large art pieces it would be impossible in the upper floors. The only use for the building could be storage, my father in law remembers the Petroleum Building in the 30's being used to store hay.

Good point Bob. One main point which Ospurt raises is that "they" don't seem to have a plan or idea as to what they are doing.

Why are they so hell bent to tear it down? Have other uses for the building been looked at other than demolition? What is the total cost of demolition? What are the benefits vs. the cost of tear-down? And what will take its place?

I have not seen the answers to any of these questions. And yes, Ospurt, this shows a complete lack of leadership on this (and many other) issues affecting the city.

Bob's got the right idea, so the MMD and the city council don't have to reinvent the wheel, although they'd like to and take credit for it: many U.S. cities have successfully revitalized their downtowns by making vacant existing structures multiuse facilities in the form of housing-retail-restaurant-art spaces. Until you attract more folks downtown, the last thing you need is more parking at this point in development time.
I've followed this somewhat but not in detail, so check my facts on this, but the other boondoggle is that first, the tax-exempt MMD acquires it, sells it to another tax-exempt entity, the city, which takes it off the tax roll, so the project doesn't help the tax base, and Juan and Juana Sixpack end up paying proportionately more in property taxes. But then this from the city that spawned Bush light and the current Texas House of Representatives Speaker of the House. Go Rebels!

when I first read this, I laughed when they said they were going to have egg on their face-I thought, I think htey fail to see that they already do. but I forgot the audience. When it comes down to having something to show, all they really care about is impressing the legislature, which created the district, rather than the local citizenry-consent of the governed, right?

There can be no argument at this point that there was never an actual plan before the spending of the taxpayer's money...twice...in the acquisition of this building.

Perhaps an idea..or hopes even, but no plan.

The fallback is now to save face by having the appearance of a plan.

I used to work in that building waaaaayyy back when. The graveyard shift was pretty spooky because the place, I could swear, was haunted! I'm sure it was the building making the noises buildings do but try to convince me of that at 3am.

And I'm continually amazed that the building "owners" didn't take responsibility for this Blue Elephant. If, as it was purported, had asbestos then it was both expensive and unhealthy to maintain. So how did it fall on John Q Publics shoulders to pay for this environmental mess? Wouldn't it be better to leave it alone? Do we really need more parking spaces? Damn! What gets me is that if private money doesn't want to "invest" downtown than why must we! If we're only talking about "numbers" then why down't some of these soulful patrons of the public take out their check books and write out some "numbers" and pay for it themselves. Ever notice how they never do that?

How many of the members of the MMMD, MDC, and other entitities who are allocating tax money to this project (the "soul of the city" according to the MRT) are planning to move downtown themselves?