Vacant and/or Abandoned Skyscrapers - Page 2

Roadcruiser1 · #21 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 12:15 AM**

The building by Texas, and Fannin Streets. It's on Google Maps, and Street View. The building is actually called the Texas Tower. It was built in 1931. It is actually the last art deco building built for Houston. It's original use was as commercial office space. There are a total of 21 floors. It's height is around 315 feet tall. The building is vacant. It's best to convert it into an apartment or condominium building, because if it becomes a hotel it would compete with the Magnolia Hotel right across the street. I wished I had the money though. If I did that building would be an apartment building.

http://www.emporis.com/application/?...houston-tx-usa

Here is proof

photoLith · #22 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 1:18 AM**

^
Someone came in during the 70s or something and tore out the bottom of the building and replaced with an ugly glass base, sucks.

photo by me from 5 days ago...
Heres two other notable buildings in Houston right across from the new MainPlace tower, they are beauties but in very very bad shape. They would make for some awesome condos in the future or a hotel. But somebody would need lots and lots to restore these buildings. Theyve been abandoned ever since my family moved to Houston back in 97 and Im sure theyve been abandoned much much longer than that. The bottom of the building on the right is gutted and is now just a giant rotting open space where homeless people live. On the backside of that building you can just go up to the bricks and rub your finger across the mortar and it falls right out.

Roadcruiser1 · #23 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 1:32 AM**

What corner in Houston are those nice looking buildings on. I think it might be possible to find some information on Emporis. Like the height, and what it was used for?.

photoLith · #24 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 1:37 AM**

^
At the corner of Fannin and Rusk.

photoLith · #25 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 1:43 AM**

Heres one more abandoned and or vacant buildings in Houston, the one in the middle, another beautiful art deco just rotting.

photos all by me.

All of the ones I outlined are abandoned.

EuphoricOctopus · #26 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 1:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

Just saying, but damn Detroit has so many empty buildings. It must be that people are leaving the city, and I read that Detroit has a high crime, and poverty rate.

The David Stott Building and the Book Tower are vacant as of last year due to bad ownership. Had nothing to do with population or anything else. Most likely they will be converted into residential in a couple years.

The Michigan Central Station was a product of no one really riding trains anymore and the wonderful Amtrack system. (Abandoned in 1988) Also, it is owned by a shitty owner.

Roadcruiser1 · #27 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 1:57 AM**

That building is the Texaco Building (1111 Rusk Street). The building was completed in 1938. The original use of the building to believe it or not was to be a Hotel, but since it was the Great Depression the plans fell flat. The building was completed, but there isn't any rooms or anything inside. Just empty floors. I guess this is one of the buildings that weren't realized not even in the 1950's. The building has 18 floors, and is 243 feet tall.

http://www.emporis.com/application/?...houston-tx-usa

photoLith · #28 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 2:02 AM**

^
WTF, so its basically been abandoned ever since 1938? Thats insane, I had no idea.

Roadcruiser1 · #29 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 2:11 AM**

The Great Depression killed, and stopped many skyscraper constructions. One of the greatest examples is in NYC. It's the Metrolife North Tower.

Roadcruiser1 · #30 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 2:20 AM**

All these abandoned buildings in Houston is insane. How many of them are actually abandoned?. I can spend my entire life scanning, and not find some of their names. Like what they say "Everything is bigger, and better in Texas" so the number of abandoned buildings is bigger, and better then anywhere else.

photoLith · #31 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 2:24 AM**

4 out of the 6 I outlined can safely be said they are abandoned. The only one I know of that anything is being done to it is that white one in the back. They are trying to allocate funds to remove the ugly 1960s cladding and restore that building to its original state. Theyve already taken some of the cladding off to see the shape the old facade is in below it. Its right across from MainPlace and has been vacant for decades.

Roadcruiser1 · #32 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 3:03 AM**

1111 Rusk Street could be structurally insecure. I won't be questioning it if it were abandoned for 2-3 years, but from research it has been abandoned for 73 years. It might appear fine outside, but if isn't maintained in the inside I am sure the roof is leaking water into the structure, which encourages mold growth, and the mold growth could be severely dangerous for it's long term abandonment. I won't find it weird if there were small plants growing inside the building. The plant growth would damage the concrete, and some steel would be bent or rusted beyond repair. The mold would spread around the walls causing the walls to become extremely discolored effecting all water, gas, and electric objects put into the structure during construction. The paint would be horribly chipped off, and it's just not safe. If this is the truth then that building would have to demolished.

Then again this is the topic for abandoned buildings. So sorry for derailing a bit, but potentially all of these abandoned building if it had been abandoned long enough would be in the same structural condition, and would witness the same fate. That fate would be the wrecking ball.

ardecila · #33 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 7:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago

I noticed that there were more than a few empty/abandoned buildings in Houston when I was there in November. . . the notable one being already posted here, but there are certainly more of them in the high-rise variety. . . but for some reason they all looked like old hotels from the 1960s. . . weird. . . maybe someone else here knows more about it. . .

. . .

We discussed this in another thread recently... Houston's economy has had a bit of a "feast or famine" problem, in that when the city is booming, there is so much money flowing around that many corporations prefer to anchor brand-new towers rather than locate in old ones - sometimes because of ego (they want the tallest) or control (they want a tailor-made building). When the economy is on a down period, there's little money available for any development at all.

As Houston's economy has diversified away from the monolithic focus on oil, the development of the city's downtown has become more stable.

New Orleans has the exact same history, except that after the 1980s, the city decided to focus on the growth of tourism to recover from the oil glut, instead of diversifying and growing jobs in a wide range of sectors like Houston did. Consequently, the only new towers we've seen since the 1980s are hotels to handle the tourists, and perhaps 2 or 3 residential mid-rises built very recently.

urbanlife · #34 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 8:00 AM**

And here I thought this was going to be a thread all about Detroit, I kid, I kid...actually off the top of my head, there is a mid century office building here in Portland that has been vacant for a while now (though I think the first floor might be leased or something like that.) Then there is the Smith Tower in Seattle that is almost vacant due to a bad business move right before the housing bust happened.

Policy Wonk · #35 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 9:11 AM**

I don't think you guys are right about 1111 Rusk Street, I recognize the address from Texaco documents well into the 1980's.

MolsonExport · #36 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 1:53 PM**

I am very surprised by the volume of vacancies down South (esp Houston). I too expected the contributions to be preponderantly from the Rustbelt/Midwest (e.g., Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Rochester, St. Louis).

I am drawing a blank on large vacant skyscrapers in Canada. I really cannot think of any.

Golyadkin · #37 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 2:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

I don't think you guys are right about 1111 Rusk Street, I recognize the address from Texaco documents well into the 1980's.

Yeah, some of the info on the building in this thread is a bit off from what I've found.
Here's what I can gather from some searching:
-It was built in 1915, and expanded in the late '30s.
-When it was built, it was the "Texas Company Building".
-It was later known as the "Texaco Building"
-In 2002, it was purchased with the intent of renovating it and turning it into housing or a hotel.
http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2...02_Texaco.html

flar · #38 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 2:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I am very surprised by the volume of vacancies down South (esp Houston). I too expected the contributions to be preponderantly from the Rustbelt/Midwest (e.g., Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Rochester, St. Louis).

I am drawing a blank on large vacant skyscrapers in Canada. I really cannot think of any.

Large skyscrapers, no, but there are some large vacant/abandoned buildings in Hamilton, Ontario.

Like these ones for example:

niwell · #39 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 7:06 PM**

I can't really think of any highrises in Toronto that are actually abandoned, and certainly not downtown. There are quite a few buildings with high vacancy rates in the inner-suburbs though.

The former Imperial Oil tower (built in 1957) in Toronto and located about 5km north of downtown was vacated in 2008:

wikipedia commons

While still technically vacant the building is about to undergo conversion to condos. Not sure what's going on at the moment. Probably doesn't really count as abandoned.

Also this building in the Don Mills area of the city:

http://www.waltonadvocates.com/_imag...5_Eglinton.jpg

Basically the owners of the property wanted to tear down the building and build condos. The City was opposed to this on the grounds that the land is designated for employment. So the tenants weren't allowed to renew leases and as far as I know it's still empty. Haven't been in the area for well over a year though.

vid · #40 Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 7:28 PM**

According to this, 111 Richmond is vacant (or was at the time the chart was made).

This is the only decent photo I can find of it:

It's a Peter Dickinson building too. Shame it's unused.