Sorry to get off topic and pull up an old post....... but, keep San Antonio lame?

Well, if it works.....
I know that's the last slogan my city needs.....

Anyway, San Antonio has a pretty nice skyline. But do anyone of you know why San Antonio isn't building taller?

I understand it to be because SA has few large businesses, and alot of those chose to locate their campuses in the burbs.

San Antonio has a good deal of large businesses, but where the problem lies is the archaic laws the conservation society has forced on the city.

Cheaper and easier to build campuses

I wouldn't say the Conservation Society is being completely unreasonable. Without them we wouldn't have a lot of structures that make SA unique.

About Vidorra,
I heard that some of the customer that had purchased units during the design phase, were very upset with the change in design for the condo.
I talked to someone in there sales office, and they said it was the historical society, complaining about the building not fitting in with the St. Pauls Square area.:slob:

My beef, about the conservation society, is that they did nothing to save the Brackenridge Swiss Sky ride, which was a great way to experience the SA skyline.

I actually like the new Vidorra design more than the original one with the fins. The original design looked like it was more suited for the Pearl District here in Portland than San Antonio. What "looks cool" in one city doesn't necessarily fit in another. I'm glad the historical society was able to get the design changed.

In the future I'd like to see a couple of buildings like the Vidorra show up in River North.

This is unique? This is San Antonio? This downtown.

:yuck:

http://www.all-hotels.com/images/hot...ntaccfront.jpg

I think the Conservation Society is doing its best to keep San Antonio lame. ;)

Every city has cheesy mid level hotels downtown. Don't expect too much from the new Embassy Suites; it will not look any better.

I don't know.... I think the Embassy Suites will either go with the colorful look (Valencia) or the faux-historic look. I can't see the HDRC approving another building that looks like the Holiday Inn on the Riverwalk...and I don't think that a building on Houston Street and the Riverwalk could ever be quite as cheesy as the La Quinta at the intersection of Parking lot and Interstate.

I'm not saying the CS is perfect, far from it. Lots of times I think they go after the wrong things, and then something more important gets torn down. But if they didn't exist there would be no one to preserve historic structures in a historic city. They just need to prioritize.

Found something about the AT&T site:

http://www.sanantonioriver.org/sbc_site.html

This is probably completely outdated, since its SBC. But hey, its something.

The best thing was the Mayor downsizing the HDRC. That'll help in the long run.

It is very outdated. The building (drawing) to the left is actually a SAHA's development.

Taken by schriver @ Flickr

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2289/...a18e6238_b.jpg

Two questions:

A) Is there some ordinance besides "no building can be visible behind the Alamo" that's preventing those parking lots from being something other than, well, parking lots?

B) Why the heck does Days Inn need that many signs?

A. Don't think so other than a building can't be visible behind the Alamo.

B. Looks like there's three different Days Inns?

A) No ordinance, there is just no reason to build anything.
B) This photo actually captures another dimension that shows the sign gaining strength and moving to take over downtown.

I see great residential potential right here. Low-rises, 3-5 stories, mixed-use, bottom retail or office, underground parking.