Abandoned gas stations

[Stone]

What is the deal with the abandoned gas stations around town and why is it so hard to develope these properties? There is an old Texaco station on 81st and Sheridan that has been sitting vacant for at least three years now. Seems like a great location for a small business ie coffee shop or something. They are such eyesores, especially if they are'nt maintained.

[TheArtist]

81st and Sheridan? Where is that? North Dallas? 

[dbacks fan]

What is the deal with the abandoned gas stations around town and why is it so hard to develope these properties? There is an old Texaco station on 81st and Sheridan that has been sitting vacant for at least three years now. Seems like a great location for a small business ie coffee shop or something. They are such eyesores, especially if they are'nt maintained.

Most likely, no one wants to pay for the removal of the undergrond tanks and piping for the pumps, even though the building is gone.

[dbacks fan]

81st and Sheridan? Where is that? North Dallas? 

North East, you know, Richardson/Plano........

[Red Arrow]

81st and Sheridan? Where is that? North Dallas? 

Nah, just north.  I only get that far north a few times per month.

[Wilbur]

What is the deal with the abandoned gas stations around town and why is it so hard to develope these properties? There is an old Texaco station on 81st and Sheridan that has been sitting vacant for at least three years now. Seems like a great location for a small business ie coffee shop or something. They are such eyesores, especially if they are'nt maintained.

Feel free to purchase and develop, but I'll bet there are tons of stipulations put on the buyer by seller.

[Hoss]

Most likely, no one wants to pay for the removal of the undergrond tanks and piping for the pumps, even though the building is gone.

That's likely exactly it, as there are many EPA hoops to jump through to get those things dismantled.  There's an old EZ Mart location on the NW corner of 41st/Garnett (north of the QT on the SW corner) where the building has been razed, but I don't think the tanks have been removed.

[Townsend]

The old gas station South of 15th and Peoria...were those tanks removed before it was re-opened as the salon?

Do the tanks always have to be removed or just drained?

[Gaspar]

From what I know, The tanks have to be removed if construction is going to take place over them, but either way they have to be inspected, and the soil around them tested for contaminants.  If found (very likely for an old station) then things get really expensive.  Most developers don't want to touch the deal unless they know that the corner will yield significant development income.

[dbacks fan]

Years ago on the northwest corner of Pine and North 75th E Ave. there was a gas station next to Jorgensen Steel (not refering to the QT that was on the east side of 75th) that sat closed for a number of years. After a wet spring, one of the underground tanks actuall floated up through the concrete drive and had to be removed because one end was about three feet above the concrete. It was one of the older steel tanks and had started to rust in the ground as well. You would think that it would be a requirement of the demolishion of the building to rmove the tanks.

[Stone]

I think if your a gas station and you go out of business, it should be required to remove your tanks, if for nothing else, environmental reasons. That being said some businesses have been built on top of old gas stations like enterprise car rental at 61st and Sheridan and the above mentioned 15th and peoria location. There are far too many that just sit boarded up and vacant though (61st and Lewis, 51st and Peoria, Harvard south of 81st, Kenosha and Lynn lane and Main and Kenosha both in BA) and that's a shame. There are probably alot more with many of the Shell stations shutting down.

[Red Arrow]

I expect that if a gas station were making enough money to remove the tanks, it would still be a gas station.

[rwarn17588]

A few states, such as Arizona, have begun small-scale program in which the state pays for the gas-tank removal and remedial cleanups.

The justification is that the property is just sitting there, doing nothing and possibly making the parcel even more toxic over time. Those states clean up the properties, making them much more viable for development or adaptive reuse.

It makes sense to me.

[Conan71]

A few states, such as Arizona, have begun small-scale program in which the state pays for the gas-tank removal and remedial cleanups.

The justification is that the property is just sitting there, doing nothing and possibly making the parcel even more toxic over time. Those states clean up the properties, making them much more viable for development or adaptive reuse.

It makes sense to me.

Better yet:  rather than being a drain on the taxpayers, why not require a remediation deposit when the original permit is let for the project?  If they don't have enough money to pay for the installation and ultimate removal of the tanks when they go into business, then don't let them open in the first place.

State still takes care of the remediation, to make sure it happens, but isn't out a nickel to do it.

[Gaspar]

Better yet:  rather than being a drain on the taxpayers, why not require a remediation deposit when the original permit is let for the project?  If they don't have enough money to pay for the installation and ultimate removal of the tanks when they go into business, then don't let them open in the first place.

State still takes care of the remediation, to make sure it happens, but isn't out a nickel to do it.

Makes far too much sense, so it will never happen.  Also I have this strange suspicion that politicians will find a way to borrow against or flat out spend that money.  Call me silly.