Here’s a view of the new sign up at the now-scrubbed site of the former Wilshire Village Apartments at the corner of West Alabama and Dunlavy. It’s . . . for sale! Apparently, all that demolition work was just for staging.
Can we get a closeup on that sign?
***
- Land Listings [David Nettles]
- Wilshire Village coverage [Swamplot]
Photo: Swamplot inbox
I’ll give them one mheeeelion dollars!!
I’m glad they cleared that lot so that prospective buyers can really see what 7.68 acres really looks like.
Assholes. As if it couldn’t have sold for the land value with the buildings on it. Or been salvaged at all before they demo’d it.
Marc and all the people that wanted pieces of these buildings should have bought the property.
You can argue about the importance of saving the architectural pieces, but in the end the property owner can do with it what they please.
And calling the current owners names doesn’t help your cause of saving anything. It just makes you look silly and discredits your cause.
kjb434, I know that there was at least one very serious buyer about three years ago. The owners had no interest in talking to her then.
Oh, do please tell me the ways of your real estate world, for I know not how it works.
Seriously. I’ve been following this story long enough and been to the property enough times myself to know what’s happened. People were willing to buy it with buildings at asking price. Other people offered to pay money to come do salvage themselves, meaning no extra work for the property owner or his demo crew, just money in the pocket.
If all I did was call them assholes, then yes, I’d deserve to be put back in my spot. But I have formed a valid opinion over time, attempting to document the property through several means, and am entitled to said opinion.
Sure, if I had the means I would have made every effort to obtain the property in order to realize its preservation and potential. Unfortunately that’s hard to do when you pull in $13K a year.
The property owner can certainly do whatever the hell they want, and did. In this instance, I believe it makes [both of them] assholes.
If memory serves, I believe inquiries to the owner regarding any salvage were ignored. Marc, et al, let’s pool our resources and buy out kjb434’s place along with the broken record. No profanity please.
[Darby Mom, my apologies about the choice word, didn’t think it would be inflammatory.]
“…end the property owner can do with it what they please.” Yeah, and that’s why this is such an exciting place to live! If we want old buildings we can go to Europe, right?
no profanity my ass.
Everybody has to agree with my point of view, or, or, or… I’m gonna jump up and down and, and… CALL THEM NAMES AND CURSE AT THEM!!
Jeezuz F****ng C***st people, some of you grow up.
My apologies for the partially deleted expletives. I normally avoid swearing online, but sometimes it seems to be the only way to get some peoples attention (which is a sad testament to said people).
People were willing to buy it with buildings at asking price.
If they’ve already had an offer at asking price then why is it still for sale?
Sometimes, it just has to be said, “SHUT UP KJB!”
and sometimes it has to be me to say it.
Please don’t shut up KJB.
We have really come to a bad place when we start shouting down people who point out that we might not want to hand over our property rights to the government.
Marc and all the people that wanted pieces of these buildings should have bought the property.
You can argue about the importance of saving the architectural pieces, but in the end the property owner can do with it what they please.
And calling the current owners names doesn’t help your cause of saving anything. It just makes you look silly and discredits your cause.
———————————–
Yes, the property owner can do what he pleases, but the demolition was spiteful, and thus people are insulted and angered…NUMEROUS attempts were made to contact Matt Dilick before the demolition with offers to buy the property as is (was) and yet he proceeded with the demolition. Pointless, wasteful, and I hope he’s forced to hold onto that property for a very long time and pay property taxes on it and that when he finally does manage to sell its for much less than his asking price and he’s forced into bankruptcy and has to go live in a place just as run down as Wilshire Village was – the jerk deserves nothing less.
jgriff, I don’t understand how the government has entered the discussion. Preservation does not imply government involvement, if that’s where you are drawing your conclusion.
As to why it’s still for sale, the offer was made a couple years ago, and as mentioned, the owners [then Cohen and Dilick] wouldn’t talk to whomever it was. Just like they wouldn’t talk with the people that approached them about salvage, despite numerous inquiries.
To beat the deadest of horses, it’s a shame what happened to a once beautiful property that had a lot of potential, all because of some terrible management.
Yes, the property owner can do whatever they want, and it’s ridiculous to have an opinion about it, because we all know that what happens on one property has ABSOLUTELY NO EFFECT on the surrounding properties and neighborhoods. That’s why nobody in Houston has deed restrictions, and houses next door to nightclubs sell for top dollar, and nobody ever complains when someone wants to open a bar next door or build a high-rise near them!
I haven’t been following the Wilshire Village story closely at all, but it strikes me as odd that a derelict property would be held for a couple years, only to be hastily torn down and marketed as land, even though reasonable offers were made long beforehand by QUALIFIED preservation-minded buyers. Demolition costs lots of money. It’s a huge investment to make for a property to sit vacant with zero revenue. Presumably these guys aren’t alabaster retards, so I’d tend to believe that there’s probably a behind-the-scenes story that you guys just don’t know about.
.
I’d wager that Commerce Equities was going to redevelop the site as more apartments like they have elsewhere, that they got financing agreed to, and that their lender bailed on them in the eleventh hour. It’s a story that was repeated all over Texas. Hell, I even worked for a company that this happened to, that is up until cash got tight and I got laid off.
TheNiche,
The property was not completely vacant until April 2009. The backstory is that Cohen [who brought Dilick in 5 years ago at 20% ownership and control of the property] is crazy. I have heard stories from former tenants who lived there as recently as March and tenants who were there in the early 90s.
John–LOL! Let’s see how many people don’t get it.
rumor is they are going to put a Pontiac dealership there….
…but the demolition was spiteful, and thus people are insulted and angered…
__________________
I suspect the only way Dillick could get the property sold was to have it condemned by the city. Cohen apparently wanted to try to save it. I suspect only Cohen knows. And at this point it doesn’t matter, does it?
One thing is apparent. The fire department didn’t just suddenly decide to condemn it. Someone with the city sent them to condemn it. And that right there is good reason not to vote for anyone currently on city council or in the mayor’s office or the controller’s office ever again.
I love all the “He owned it so he can do as he damn well pleases” apoligists on this board. The world would be such a better place if we all just ignored everyone else’s wishes and did only as we pleased. Wasn’t that Jesus’ message or are Republicans just confused?
Wow Doofus! You managed to stereotype a political party and insult Christianity in a small post!
Jesus had no concern for matters of material possessions which means he would have no part of our silly arguments about this topic. He would have been above the fray.
I didn’t insult Christianity. I insulted those who pretend to be Christian but then talk as if individual rights trump all others. But, it doesn’t surprise me that you didn’t get the message…
Marc,
Other posters are calling them assholes and jerks who would destroy architecture out of spite. These kids of accusations get to me because they’re just being emoted by folks with only a peripheral understanding of how the world works. I’m trying to cut to the core of the issue, which I’m betting is financial in scope, not merely brought about by spite. …except the evidence offered in comments doesn’t match with what rational people would do. So either my assumption is wrong or the evidence is wrong.
.
And now you’re saying Cohen was crazy. There are lots of kinds of crazy. What kind of crazy are we talking about?
I opined that Wilshire Village was lovely: Classic, unique and worthy of saving as an historical example. There are too few in Houston!
Now cleared, the property is still beautiful, because of the green – the trees!
PLEASE PLEASE save the trees!
OMG omg save the trees!
That is all.
I lived there. Cohen is coo coo. Sums it up. (Glad he was coo coo, I paid $305 for a 2 br for 20 years.)
jgriff, I don’t understand how the government has entered the discussion. Preservation does not imply government bu, if that’s where you are drawing your conclusion.
KJB mentioned that the people who wanted to save this place should put their money where their mouth is and buy it and was shouted down by an angry mob. Wouldn’t a mob that doesn’t want to buy the property but still wants to save it by definition be for getting it by another means?
odd logic, jgriff.
@The Niche, oh there’s a backstory, and many of us know it. Family feuds, Fertittish syle of takeover, ugly ugly ugly.
@theniche I stand behind the spite comment. The deal made no fiscal sense and the property would arguably been more valuAble un-razed. Yes that’s right MORE valuable if for no other reason than that there was so much interest in preserving it. There was money to be made in deconstructing the property also and the owners literally threw thousands of dollars in the landfill. A project in Austin recently took the site of Concordia university and rather than scraping it bare allowed it to be repurposed. From what I understand 80-90% of the material was removed. I just don’t get this mentality that it’s cost effective to scrape everything away and start from scratch everytime. Although I suppose once they finagled to get the propert condemned they could not list it without remediation. What a stellar business model.
Just because a deal appears inexplicable does not mean that it is made out of spite to some inconsequential set of non-stakeholders. Maybe there’s something going on behind the scenes or maybe an owner actually is coo-coo.
.
As for recycling, salvage rights are something that is covered by the property owner’s contract with the demolition company. It’s very common for the demolition company to make good money on salvaged brick, recycled concrete, scrap metals, etc., and if it were written into the contract, that’d explain why nobody returned calls. The calls may well have been placed to an entity that had given up its rights to the improvements. There’d be nothing for them to discuss.
i am struck by the term “Alabaster Retards.” it sums up the situation very neatly. this property has been on and off the delinquent tax rolls for years. as a neighbor, i have been confronted by a party involved on the street, on my front porch, and even at the wash and fold laundry. …under the simple two chess move guise of provoke, get punched, and sue for assault. it was an unstable situation for at least the last 10 years.
I think TheNiche is almost certainly right that if the financing (and, for that matter, the whole market) hadn’t fallen apart we would have seen the place razed and redeveloped months, if not years, ago.
It also seems reasonable that the salvage rights for materials could and should go to the demolition company. That doesn’t seem like that would have been a difficult message to communicate to the several people who inquired about salvage, even though it’s not what they wanted to hear.
But let’s be clear about what “freedom to do what they want with their property” means. It only means that as long as they break no laws they are not subject to arrest and criminal prosecution. It most assuredly does not mean that they are not potentially liable to civil suits if there are causes with merit, and it certainly does not mean that they should expect a free pass in the court of public opinion. And the most likely place I would expect to find strongly negative sentiment about their actions is in the comments of a blog about architecture and real estate. Especially one where historic preservation is a frequent topic. For those posters who are expressing variations on “Shut up already, its freedom, no zoning, market forces, you’re not the owner and your opinion doesn’t matter, etc.” I would like to invite you to the detention pond near my house. The frogs there are very noisy and maybe you can yell at them and get THEM to shut up! ;-)
“I love all the “He owned it so he can do as he damn well pleases†apoligists on this board. The world would be such a better place if we all just ignored everyone else’s wishes and did only as we pleased. Wasn’t that Jesus’ message or are Republicans just confused?”
“I didn’t insult Christianity. I insulted those who pretend to be Christian but then talk as if individual rights trump all others. But, it doesn’t surprise me that you didn’t get the message…”
Doofus (what an appropriate moniker), you manage to show your true colors. Leftists are the only ones that are allowed to besmirch and insult conservatives if they want. Conservatives cannot voice their opinion. Free speech is only for liberals. Conservatives are not allowed to publicly state factual information if it annoys liberals. The truth, only as interpreted by liberals, is all that is allowed. Bipartisanship is only for when conservatives are willing to compromise their positions and cater to liberal whims, even in event of verified overwhelming public opposition to the liberal’s stance. Property rights are only allowable when it further enhances a liberal’s perspective. The only religion that does not qualify for free speech is Christianity…. when a liberal says so.
It gets so tiring hearing the same old nonsense with no basis in reason or common sense. The property in question is an unrestricted piece of land in which the owner can do whatever they choose to, so far as if it falls within the guidelines of currently legal property usage, bottom line.
Doofus, you have such a naive, inaccurate perception of what people who do not have the same views that you do, you are incapable of maintaining a cognizant discussion with thinking adults.
This blog has many differing opinions and viewpoints, that usually disagree with one another. That’s what makes Swamplot what it is. The fact that someone disagrees with another poster, doesn’t provide anyone else here carte blanche to resort to junior high school level name calling. Some of the people here need to just grow up some. Of course, for some here, that may not be possible.
I lived at Willshire Village in the early 80’s. It was falling apart back then, and the owners were known to be half a bubble off. What has happened is pretty unfortunate as the apartment units were well designed, and the open space on the property was very generous. Frankly, it is amazing that it took as long as it did for things to reach the state they are currently in.
As for the property rights issue, it has pretty much all been said already… In Houston, quality of life, aesthetics, history and our ecosystem have all been sacrificed in favor of individual property rights (and the freeway feeder road). We have reaped what we have sown.
“In Houston, quality of life, aesthetics, history and our ecosystem have all been sacrificed in favor of individual property rights (and the freeway feeder road). We have reaped what we have sown.”
I completely disagree. Our I believe quality of life is quite high in Houston. Of course, there is no definitive definition of quality of life. It’s a buzz word use to stir emotions yet has no objective definition. A lot of people love living in this city. The path of this city and region’s development has allow more people to live higher quality lives than many other regions.
I think are reaping lots of benefits from our way of doing things versus other regions. So I’m happy to keep reaping.
Also, never assume one’s version of quality is the same as another person’s view.
P.S.: Our regional ecosystem is quite fine.
Never assume kjb’s definition of ecosystem as everybody else. Mine involves trees and clear stream. His involve festering sewers and clean pavement as far as the eye can see.
I am really amazed at this debate. The principle is very simple. The land is too valuable for the revenue generating capacity of existing structures. You can’t rent those spaces for enough money, no matter how you remodel. This is definately a high density project and could be high-rise site in a better market, where are you going to find north of 7 acres in an area like this? The Fiesta across the street is in the Cohen family, so that could be in play. The Cohen family is surrounded by real estate guys. The real shame here, is that you have complicated personalities that probably prevented any new construction during a time in which it would have been viable, so now they are trying to market a property in a climate that almost no one can get financing that would make a deal work. A new project would have provided comfortable living space in a convenient and desirable location, with maybe even a mixed use component.
You tear down 40+ year old properties, that have a great deal of deferred maintanence, for marketing purposes, and now they can showcase those beautiful magnolia trees, which I hope they can preserve as many as possible, but it has to make economic sense.
I am sure that if someone will make a fair market value offer, and they are a credible buyer, they would sell. Death to rumors. The dirt could be as much as $100 a foot, if you turned back the clock 2 years. It is special so may still demand it.
The last two comments on this thread illustrate my point rather well. Mstark (who obviously disagrees Kjb) throws baseless insults without merit or prudent reasoning to back up said insults, and Alexander makes thoughtful observations based on common sense.
I completely agree with Alexander. Whatever ends up here, will be a mid to high rise type property. That is the only way any profit can be made, with the cost of the land.
As to a Highrise, I don’t think the location is quite ritzy enough for a Highrise like the “proposed” Ashby, which would be on a nice street (Bissonett), in a neighborhood closer to the Medical Center, Rice, Parks, and Museum District.
Our neighborhood at Dunlavy and W Alabama is still in transistion, with nice new townhomes, updated houses, and a fair share of rundown 4 plexes and rental properties.
I would have to say, if a highrise condo was built, it would have good views of Downtown, the Medical Center and more!
Dunlavy would need to be upgraded from a 2 lane open ditch road to a nice curb and guttered street.
Alexander is my hero. Well said.
Thanks Alexander for presenting the real world!
Based on land I’d seen, they might’ve pushed for $80/sf at one time and been reasonably successful. I don’t think that this was ever triple-digit land. Today, I’d be surprised if it transacts for half that–if it transacts. This is not a highrise site; the costs are prohibitive, even now. Probably four-story midrise, maybe up to six or eight if they use epicore, but steel prices would have to come down further, and I don’t think that they will.
.
Alexander’s hypothesis over why this was such a botched process of condemnation and demolition is very reasonable, however I very much disagree with the assertion that just because the improvements were incapable of yielding significant revenues, that they had to be torn down. By the time condemnation occured, it would’ve been obvious enough that financing wasn’t going to come through for new construction, and so a renovation program should have been implemented (just the ‘Plan B’ that was done at Westcreek Apartments). The worst thing that can happen to land that valuable is that someone spend an ass-load of money up-front to eliminate all revenue or the possibility of revenue for a period of (probably) many years. For now it’s just a property tax money pit.
I moved in next door to this property the week before they put the fence up around it. A few times, there were condemnation notices on lovely pink government paper tacked to the fence asking Dilick to appear before a judge to state the intentions of the condemned property. I also hear the owner (Dilick or the other one, not sure) has cancer and has therefore been unable to really care what happens to it. I rent, so my opinion probably doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things, but if there is any way to keep those beautiful, old trees around I’ll be happy. Plus, the breeze coming through my windows due to the lack of property next door is fantastic! The kids doing donuts in the mud in the middle of the night… not so fantastic!