Oak Cliff Christian Church: cost breakdown and suggested uses

One of the comments on a blog post about the status of Oak Cliff Christian Church posed the question: If Dallas ISD bought the church for $450,000, why is the Old Oak Cliff Conservation League sale price $1.2 million?

I posed the question to OOCCL leaders John McCall and Michael Amonett, who have been working hard to find a taker for the historical structure before the Aug. 16 deadline. (The league even held an open house on a recent Saturday, inviting everyone to take a peek at the stripped-down church.) McCall explained that, after purchasing the building, Dallas ISD spent $479,000 to purchase and close on the property, plus another $553,000 on asbestos abatement (the building is now certified asbestos free). The remainder is because of legal and maintenance costs, McCall says.

The league chose neighborhood resident Monte Anderson of Options Real Estate to sell the church. Anderson, most well known for his ownership of the Belmont Hotel, also owns a number of properties in and around our neighborhood, and happens to care quite a bit about new urbanism. The listing for Oak Cliff Christian Church on the Options Real Estate website markets it as a structure that "could live on for another century. At least four city blocks in front, and to either side of the church complex will be cleared in the next year for athletic fields. Acres of green space will frame the structure and its view of the Dallas skyline." The land is currently zoned multi-family, and the OOCCL press release suggests that the view of downtown "makes a residence or a condominium conversion ideal."

My guess is that the OOCCL is hoping Oak Cliff Christian Church finds its own version of Mark Thomas and Candice Chase.

By |2010-04-22T12:01:00-05:00April 22nd, 2010|Dallas ISD, News|1 Comment

About the Author:

One Comment

  1. Amy C April 22, 2010 at 10:10 PM

    It could be so many things! Yes, someone may have to own it a long time to recoup the investment, but its history and architecture could never be replicated.

    It could be:

    1. Apartments for teachers working under Education is Freedom or some other “residency” program

    2. An urban campus for a college

    3. An AP or college prep program for Adamson

    4. Fine arts building with a theater for Adamson

    5. A gym for Adamson

    and many more things.

    I just find it hard to believe that spending $1 million of our bond or tax money on a building they plan to destroy was the best use of our resources to educate our youth. And what are we teaching the kids? That disposable buildings is okay? What about repurposing, like we’ve done so well in Oak Cliff?

Comments are closed.