I just hope they add a little something on the top. The design is growing on my but I can totally see just a simple crown up top.

Like this, something as simple as the building on the left.
http://images.skyscrapercenter.com/b...db__realty.jpg

More info
 

Everyone here is another article about this project including some future development!:cheers:

https://www.expressnews.com/real-est...photo-15256297

Thanks. Very interesting.

This project is no where near the River, so I am not understanding why they are making comments about the height at all. And the 120 foot restriction on buildings is ridiculous. Is the hotel Emma taller? Anyway, I feel a restriction should be used on projects on the River, only nothing less than 300 ft.

Um, what does it says that’s interesting? It’s behind a paywall.

Seems Chicago is the closest example I can come up with offhand. Lots of tall buildings along their river, (yes, I know, not the same setup as our Riverwalk), and it is at once beautiful and cavernous.

I can see some height restrictions on the original three mile section of the Riverwalk, but not the areas just North and South of that original stretch.

"Developers have approached the Government Hill Alliance Neighborhood Association about building three other major construction projects on lower Broadway apart from GrayStreet’s tower and the Credit Human headquarters, Hill said. An office tower is in the works at Broadway and Grayson Street, and a condo tower is planned across the street from the ButterKrust Bakery building, she said.

GrayStreet is also planning a condo building on Broadway, she said. The company, which is working on numerous projects in the urban core, plans to build a massive mixed-use development on 23 acres it owns just east of Broadway in Government Hill. The development could include about 100,000 square feet of retail and up to 300,000 square feet of office space."

The part I found interesting, anyway.

This article was apparently my last free one, so in future, I'll be no help on quotes from The Express News.

Dang, Broadway is exploding. In the future I can see it kind of being like Wilshire in Los Angeles (subway and all!). That's my fever dream, anyway. Things being the way they are, though, we'll probably just end up with a more trendy version of Central Ave in Phoenix. Still, both of those would be drastic improvements. Can't wait to hear more about these mysterious rumored developments.

The "condo tower" site is almost certainly the block between Alling and Appler, which has been mostly demoed/cleared over the past few years. The majority of the block is owned by "NORTH ALAMO PROPERTIES LLC". Quick googling reveals that they purchased the alley on that block from the City recently:

https://sanantonio.legistar.com/Legi...921&FullText=1

They also applied for rezoning a couple of years ago:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...xFqSptotuXN5GX

For up to 175 units an acre. Assuming they're eventually able to buy up the holdouts and get the whole block, they could be able to build up to about 300 units. Not bad.

The "office building" is even more mysterious. The only undeveloped corner of Broadway and Grayson is where Still Golden just opened, but I feel like a building that's about to be demoed wouldn't be getting a new tenant. Maybe it's the buildings next to it? Or the houses behind it? Or they got it mixed up with the Josephine St corner?


Edit: Further googling has revealed the North Alamo Properties LLC is associated with Victor Andonie, who is President of this company: http://www.msgmanagement.com/about/ Seems like they own and operate some medium sized office buildings around town. He also appears to have developed the Museum Townhomes across from the Witte and a small subdivision in Alamo Heights. Not sure what all this means, but thought I'd throw it out there.

I took another look at the PDF they submitted to the HDRC. At the end of it they just tossed in some random photos of the Reynaldo Diaz building. Does anyone know why?

I read through it but can't figure out why they put those in. Presumably it's going to be taken down. Why include the pics?

I think "changing the proposed building cap to feature a more distinctive design" means allowing the design they've submitted... the glass box. It looks like a finished render to me, and it is clearly the taller addition to the earlier rendering. I don't know that it qualifies as "distinctive" but maybe somebody else thinks it does. Subjective opinion.

If anyone is familiar with the history of renderings submitted for Central Park Tower in New York, many people thought the render submitted was just a massing model. It wasn't... it was pretty much what is now being built.

Well I cannot wait to see what graystreet has in store.

There are a lot of wacky comments with this article. The most interesting is this:

Can't be true.

Yeah someone called them out. Like you're going to claim that and not give a source? okay...

I don’t even see what the point would be in such a project.

Texas Highway Man is a good resource on San Antonio freeway work. Right now there isn't anything remotely on the radar for this. All the news would be talking about this if it was getting ready to start. Given the location, this would be a huge (and fantastic) project that would cost multiple hundreds of millions of dollars. I call this "fake news".

http://www.texashighwayman.com/const.shtml

Guess we went backwards on this one :(
https://therivardreport.com/graystre...tower-for-now/

They have to come back with renderings and a filing with floor counts that match. That shouldn't be too big of a hurdle.

Out of this a spectacular Phoenix shall arise!!!!:cheers:
Don't worry.....:yes:

I’m not at all sure what you mean by this. Nothing went backwards. GrayStreet just needs to resubmit the design to match the proposed height and they’ll probably redesign the top and add a cool and distinctive feature to the building.

I know, just a bit dissapointed. Hope it comes out better and maybe a spire. :)

I think the right decision was made by all involved. This design can only get better.

I don't really understand why they would have used the number of floors to turn this down. This was conceptual approval. From HDRC's website:

"Once applicants have met with staff and attended the DRC meeting, it is recommended but not required, that the applicant submit an application for Conceptual Approval by the HDRC. Conceptual Approval is HDRC approval of the "concept" of the project in order to give the applicant feedback about the design and scope of the project prior to completion of 80% construction documents and significant investment by the applicant. Final Approval of an application requires 80% construction documentation for review by the HDRC before a Certificate of Appropriateness can be issued."

They're asking to double the allowed height according to zoning on this site. I can see why they wanted to get an early sign of conceptual approval before investing time and effort into the exact design.

I hope the architects are reading this thread. There's been some helpful advice and interesting points of view. It might help them.

Because who knows what they'd do with those remaining floors? They might decide to make three floors with Times Square style jumbo-trons that constantly play Gigli starring Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez, and that would totally suck even without the sound.

You do realize they would need to go back for the Certificate of Appropriateness, right?

That's the first time I've heard that term, to be honest. I was just using a ridiculous example of why giving approval without seeing a finished rendering could result in something unexpected and unwanted.

I guess I know a little about the process.... There are a couple of key things to know about HDRC:

1. There are historic guidelines and downtown design guidelines. Because this project is not in a historic district it needs to follow the downtown design guidelines.
2. There are also RIO overlay districts (that I don't know much about other than that they limit the height and vary based on how close to the SA river the site is). To get final approval to go over the height limit for this site (10 stories) they will have to get a zoning variance.
3. Final approval from HDRC comes from a Certificate of Appropriateness (CoA), conceptual design really means very little. When I got my house approved I went straight for the CoA. Larger or more daring designs will start with the Conceptual Approval which gives them some certainty before going to full design. The CoA requires 80% construction documents, a CoA has no such guidelines.

In all likelihood the project is trying to get financing, some idea of what hotel/office use would be there, and firming up details. They wanted to give themselves some wiggle room as they figure that stuff out. If they added a floor or two (or removed a few floors) before going back for final approval it wouldn't really matter that much to the design. They weren't going to add crazy things, it would just be extend the design they already had. And if they did do something crazy, HDRC could say this doesn't look like what we conceptually approved and tell them to start over.

This is also going to have to go to zoning for the variance which will require it to go to city council as well. I'm sure they were hoping to get HDRC's Conceptual Approval so that they could use that for the zoning board. Without it, they'll likely just go straight to zoning and limit the ability of HDRC to give input on height.

Thanks for the explanation.

Nobody knows what's going to happen, of course. But what's the real likelihood that the design will look significantly different from the renderings presented (plus or minus a few floors)?

I guess it depends on how the approvals go... I heard that Pearl got a variance to allow 15 floors for the site that they are building 10, if true you'd think this site should also be able to get at least 15. I would expect the mixed use portion of the development would need quite a few floors for each use. So maybe if they restrict it too much it would just do hotel or office instead of both? That seems like it would drastically change the design.

Seems a bit sloppy on Gray Street’s part that they didn’t get their ducks in a row before going to the HDRC.

Talked to a guy who works for Gensler to see if he was allowed to talk about what they were planning, he is not. But he said exciting things are coming... so... yay?

Calm down....

KSAT is reporting today on its website, that the HDRC is reviewing the 20 story building tomorrow Wednesday at 3:00pm.:cheers:

Business owners in the area are welcoming the development as well.:tup:

You're looking at old news. It was pulled. 🐙

OH, OK:shrug:

Pulled, but not dead.......:cheers:

WE SHALL SEE.:tup:

Judging by the preliminary agenda, this project is now proposed to be nineteen stories.

They managed to rework this in just a few weeks?

Sure. They're just asking for conceptual approval.

Yeah, I had a feeling they were just seeing what they could build in terms of massing while working on something else.

So you think we’ll see something significantly different in terms of aesthetic than what we’ve seen so far?

Sweet! I love to top of the brick portion of the building, that mixed with the glass portion... really cool!

I just noticed that the original renderings actually showed it with only 16 floors, but I remember TheATX saying it would have 18 occupied floors. These new renderings are showing 17. So maybe it grew a bit?

The facade is more interesting on this version. And it gained a pool on the amenity deck.

I can’t wait for this and the project next to it to get built. I hope some great companies and retail gets put there.

Well it's an improvement. I'll give it that.

Maybe I’m just lacking in vision but I was expecting the changes to be a bit more dramatic.

Other than the pool it mostly looks the same.

Well, I'm not lacking vision, this development will look stunning from the highway:cheers:

Like I said a " PHOENIX SHALL ARISE":worship:

It was a two week window, dramatic changes were not going to happen. There not going to just scrap their plans and re-design this development.

I need to see the lighting for this building at night to fully judge. I do like the lines running vertically against the glass.

The top section is really throwing me for a loop.

The renderings almost make it look like that section is a bit transparent—as if they’re just showing the massing and they’ll figure out the exterior later.

I can’t quite tell if it’s glass, or steel, or if there’s some kind of extra facade.