Nasher Says No to Museum Tower’s Offer to Replace Oculi Roof

Back to the Hatfields and McCoys.

Yesterday we reported that Trustees of the Dallas Police and Fire Pension System, which owns Museum Tower, were told by their experts there is only one solution to the building’s glare problem: re-orienting the light receptors on the Nasher roof by removing and replacing the existing. The receptors, called oculi, would be redesigned and aimed away from the 42-story condominium across the street. You wouldn’t know the physical difference unless you were hovering over the roof with a tape measure.

So they presented this to the Nasher board.

And, Museum Tower said it would foot the bill. They would pay for testing the concept on a section of roof.  Then, should the test go splendidly,  and if the Nasher agrees,  Museum Tower would then pay for the full roof installation. And the light damage from the glare into the Museum would be over.

So they presented this to the Nasher board.

Yesterday in a brief conversation, Robbie Briggs, whose firm is marketing Museum Tower, told me that the cost of replacing the oculi would be about $2 million and Museum Tower was willing to pay even more, like $5 million.

This, too, was presented to the board.

But by the time I had finished talking to the Women’s Council on Real Estate and had lunch at the Prestonwood Country Club, Nasher officials rejected the roofing offer. And they called it a recycled, flawed idea:

“The glare from Museum Tower is a problem for the entire Arts District, not just the Nasher Sculpture Center,” Nasher officials said in a statement. “Recycling the same grossly inadequate and deeply flawed idea in another publicity stunt is not a way to address the problems Museum Tower is causing for the people of Dallas. The bottom line is that the owners of Museum Tower need to fix their building.”

Yes, Museum Tower peeps did introduce the roof replacement last fall as the best way to fix the glare. At that time, though, tower officials were also considering a couple of other options, including a spray coating for the tower’s windows reflecting into/onto the Nasher.

MT officials say they have studied more than 20 possible solutions. Changing the Nasher roof is the only solution and the best way to eliminate glare inside the Nasher.

“The only 100-percent solution is the one we’re proposing,” said Greg Greene, one of the original co-developers of Museum Tower.

It’s the only remedy that restores the viewing conditions inside the Nasher galleries to the way they were before the tower was built, Greene said. He added that Museum Tower has spent more than $1 million studying potential solutions.

But Nasher officials do not want to touch the roof of their building, designed by famed architect Renzo Piano. To them, it’s like messing with a great piece of art. I mean, would you change paint colors on the Mona Lisa?

Nasher favors the installation of glare-shielding louvers on Museum Tower, but tower representatives say these won’t work. For one thing, the louvres or any tinkering with the glass exterior might render the building uninsurable.

Not only does Nasher want no changes to the building, the garden seems to be a point of contention. The Museum Tower experts say the glare has caused no damage to the Nasher’s outdoor garden. But the Nasher disagrees:

“The damage to the garden may be imperceptible to them,” said Peter Walker, the landscape architect who designed the Nasher’s garden. “But it’s very perceptible to us and our consultants. They’re simply looking at the garden and saying, ‘This doesn’t make any difference.’ Over long periods of time, it makes a lot of difference.”

My concern here of course is condo sales: has this controversy hurt them? According to the Dallas Morning News, “after the trustees’ meeting, pension system administrator Richard Tettamant said four units have sold in the past 30 days, bringing the total to 12. A handful of others await closing, he said. There are about 100 units in the building.”

Not too shabby. Tower officials expected it would take all of four years to sell out MT.

So here’s what I think: these two neighbors will continue to duke it out. Here’s what I hope: Museum Tower’s condos will continue to sell. They won’t fly off the shelves, because the pricing starts at $1.4 million. Thus far, I see five units in DCAD under what appears to be different ownership. Guess they are all Hip Pockets, as I do not see any units in MLS but am told they are there. The DCAD values range from a low of $1,068,660 to $2,161,720.

Do the math on the taxes those units can bring into town.