If that highland tower building is 15 stories with 99 units then maybe the Durango tower will be taller with 120 units?

It is the same picture.

Look at the cars they are the in the same position and are the same color!

With the Highland Tower having 99 units on 15 floors, that's 6.6 units per floor. So 23 more units would be 17 floors and about 211 feet.

miaht82, do you know who the architect is for the building?

I know. I hadn't paid attention to all of that at first, but as soon as I saw the building I knew I had seen it before.

Not sure who the architect is, it was just a photo inserted in a pdf. I'm assuming now that it is just for visual aid to show what could go there.
120-high-density "condos" are part of the overall plan, and from what I've gathered, the 4-story "texas-wrap" complex is supposed to break ground early 2009 for delivery in 2010.
The hold-up in this development has been "tax-credit" funds which would give developers an extra 11 milion to the budget instead of a 400k short, a street on that land that had to be "erased", then when the plan was drawn up, the original drawing had the buildings sitting on water or gas lines, and also the design was held up at the State Historic Preservation Office.

well, now that all of that is settled, let the speculation begin on the number of floors and height of a 120-unit building on that tract...

I think the perfect place would be Avenue E. and 3rd st., right next to the Scottish Rite Cathedral or any of those empty lots near the Old Post Office and Courthouse. All we would need is something like the Holocaust Museum in DC and it would probably help with all the foot traffic from the Alamo.

Looks like permits (page 2, 401 Santos St.) were given for the Durango Phase of Victoria Commons.
Site work is being done now.

Wow I missed this. What is it?

Its what eventually "could" be at the corner of Labor and Durango.

Mid-rise section 8 apartments? :rolleyes:

Not exactly the direction I was hoping to see downtown move...

Over $100,000 was funded for development in June 2008 according to the SAHA agenda.

mid-rise affordable living downtown. only a small percentage of units would be allocated towards low-wage workers. even then, the poor deserve decency as much as you and i do... :sly:

as you've done it for the the least of these....

http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblog...ir-p.html#more

New group hopes to have the updated Master Plan out in May. Based on Discovery Green in HOU and Buena Vista in SF...


City restarts HemisFair Park process
By
Benjamin Olivo

Talk of what should become of HemisFair Park has begun again, and a special committee is looking at urban parks in Houston and San Francisco as examples of the site's potential.

The HemisFair Park Redevelopment Ad Hoc Committee first met Jan. 14 and has met twice since. The goal of the committee is twofold:

1. To recommend a management structure for the park, meaning, the park could be managed by a department of the city, a nonprofit conservancy group (ala Main Plaza), a local government corporation, etc.

2. To rework the 2004 Master Plan to create an updated vision for the park.

The ad hoc committee is wanting to present a proposal to City Council in May.

All of this information was sent to me via e-mail from the office of deputy city manager Pat DiGiovanni after I asked for the latest about plans to renovate the park.

The city's e-mail did say the public would be included in the process, but didn't say when.

The committee is looking at Yerba Buena in San Fransisco, which includes an arts center, convention space, an ice rink and a garden.

Discovery Green in Houston is a downtown park that includes a lake, public art and an outdoor theater.

For HemisFair Park, the committee is addressing development, connectivity to the park's surrounding features (the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center, for example), the balance between green spaces and buildings, historic preservation and sustainability.
20090312hemisfair200.jpg

Read the city's 2004 Master Plan for the basis from which the committee is working and for a history of the land.

The 13-member committee is comprised of representatives from stakeholder organizations (like the Lavaca Neigborhood Association), candidates appointed by Mayor Phil Hardberger and four spots chosen via lottery from City Council nominations.

Here are the folks who form the committee:

Organizations
Xavier Gonzalez, Historic Design and Review Committee
Henry Feldman, San Antonio Convention and Visitors' Bureau
Michael Berrier, Lavaca Neighborhood Association
Julius Gribou, University of Texas at San Antonio
Andres Andujar, Downtown Alliance
Ray Knox, San Antonio Parks and Recreation Department
Joan Gaither, San Antonio Conservation Society

Mayoral appointments
Lionel Sosa, independent consultant
Daniel A. Lopez, San Antonio Federal Credit Union

District nominations
Marty Wender, developer, Quadrant A (Districts 6,7 & 8)
Ron Campos, District 10 neighborhood leader, Quadrant B (Districts 1, 9, & 10)
Arthur Emerson, public relations executive, Quadrant C (District 4 & 5)
Roy Lowey-Ball, Ford, Powell & Carson, Quadrant D (Districts 2 & 3)

— Benjamin Olivo

About ten years ago, I worked in the president's office at SAHA and learned a lot about the way public housing works. I'm also a stickler for details so I'll jump in here to clear something up. There's actually a difference (and it's a huge one) between what's commonly called 'Section 8" housing and "public" housing. Knowing the difference gives us 'construction and development' aficionados the full picture. Plus, it makes you look like the smart one in the group should it ever come up in conversation.

"Section 8" housing refers to a rent subsudy program formally known as the 'Housing Choice Voucher Program' that allows people to rent the home or apartment of their choice (providing the property meets established criteria) anywhere in town, from private landlords.

The process works like this; a qualifying family signs up for the waiting list during an open enrollment period every few years. (While I was with SAHA, the wait-list was usually around 14,000. When it dropped below 10,000, they would open the wait-list for new registrations. The average time from registration to move-in was approximately seven years.) When a person reaches the top of the list, they are notified and background checks are conducted on family members, income eligibility is determined and they are sent out to locate a rental property (house or apartment) that will pass a government life, health and safety inspection. If the landlord agrees to accept them as renters, the new tenants pay about 30% of the market rate rent themselves to the landlord each month, with the remaining 70% paid directly to the landlord by SAHA each month.

It's a good program. It's a cash cow for landlords because it's guaranteed rent, and the quality of renters tends to be better as they have passed background checks. Conservatives like it because it keeps the government out of the building and managing 'traditional' public housing developments (think the old Victoria Courts or the Alazan-Apache Courts) and pays the private sector to house these renters. Liberals like it because it disburses low-income folks around town where they can live close to their work instead of ghettoizing them in the poorest neighborhoods.

Those who stigmatize the 'Section 8' program don't realize that they probably live pretty close to 'Section 8' renters (unless they live in a neighborhood with home values north of $200,000 or so). Here's what hardly anyone knows or understands about the program outside of the public housing industry: FEDERAL LAW STATES that landlords who financed the purchase of their property (and there's still a mortgage on it) from an FDIC insured institution or government lender (Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae; pre-1997 and post-2008), CAN NOT REFUSE to lease to a 'Section 8' participant. So unless the apartment complex or home for rent was a privately financed purchase, or is owned outright, they have to take 'Section 8' renters. And with 40,000 head-of-household participants in the program in San Antonio, it's a pretty good bet that a 'Section 8' family could be your neighbor. Statistics alone say they all can't live in the poor parts of town. Agency data showed them in all parts of town.

The other type of housing program is publicly funded and government owned housing developments (again, think the old Victoria Courts, etc.) that some call 'projects' (although this term was BANNED from our vocab as employees- they were called 'developments'). The waiting list for spots in these developments is shorter. Residents still paid rent, but in a few cases it was like $14.00 a month, and that's about all it was worth. Those properties were about 50 years old, lacked air conditioning and parts of them were dangerous as hell (we'd go to the dangerous buildings early in the morning before the thug-life had started their day).

Two important points about the public housing 'developments' worth noting:

1. Funding Environment. The feds quit funding the construction and rehab of this type of housing beginning about 1994 (that's why you see a lot of them boarded up, awaiting demolition funding) and created density maximums and mixed-income requirements on all new construction (think the new Victoria Commons). Old-school public housing is essentially dead or dying. SAHA cant lease to new or transfer existing residents to facilities that are 'non-compliant' so they either move them into the 'Section 8' program, place them in a new mixed-income development (which there are hardly any as funding only creates about one new replacement unit for every 15 old units demolished), or place them in a 'less-old' complex; itself eventually facing 'non-compliant' status as SAHA's housing stock ages and federal regulations are added.

(Additional sidenote: SAHA purchased a bunch of 'regular' apartment complexes all over town from the Resolution Trust Corp in the 80's and 90's to supplement it's housing stock. They turn a profit for the agency and most market-rate renters there don't realize that their complex is wholly-owned by a subsidiary of SAHA. I dont remember the names, but there were a few in the medical center, one was on Jones-Maltzberger near Thousand Oaks, and one near Vance Jackson and Huebner.)

2. Residents. Except for a few buildings in two or three developments (out of about 50 total at the time), it wasn't dangerous. SAHA has it's own commissioned police force, residents are subject to annual background checks, and there is a federal one-strike (arrest, not even conviction) rule regarding drugs on the properties. It's so strict that a relative found in possession on property while visiting family would get the whole family evicted and banned for life from receiving any future federal housing assistance.

When I worked there, about 35% of the public housing residents were senior citizens, and an additional 25% were disabled and/or received SSI. In total, 60% of people living in 'the projects' were actually elderly or disabled; and happened to be some of the nicest people I've ever met. Wouldn't let ya leave without a plate of food, a piece of cake, or cookies to take with you, and they were getting by on far less than I was at the time. I wouldn't trade the experience for anything.

Class over. Exam on Friday. Don't stress; it's open book.

Hm, I'm glad I read that. I didn't even know there was a difference. Thanks!

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_0zVKShDflC0/Sd...0/IMG_7158.JPG

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_0zVKShDflC0/Sd...0/IMG_7159.JPG

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_0zVKShDflC0/Sd...0/IMG_7160.JPG

Ringer
 

To my knowledge, there are no plans that have been submitted to any governing, regulating, or statutory body or agency regarding Hemisfair by anyone in a position to do anything yet. To insert a photo of a project in another city and to represent it as being on Hemisfair and which is nothing more than pure vapor strikes me as being lacking in responsibility. Is that how it was really represented?

Roy,
And to our knowledge as well.
We all know that here on this forum, as we have been following the process that is taking place. We all read the "vision."
And you might be confused; this "project" that you are refering to was never said to be Hemisfair, it was said to be "representative" of what "could" be going as part of the final phase of the Durango Development. I know the thread says "{SA} Revitalizing Hemisfair Park," but usually a discussion on here leads to another and topics are crossed. In this case, the Durango Phase of Victoria Commons is across the street from Hemifair, so the topic was steered in the way of "what would compliment hemisfair/what would compliment DP of VC?" seeing as how they can directly affect and mix with each other.

So this photo was never said to be on Hemisfair (although many of us wish it was.) and I'm sorry if you perceived it that way.

No offense
 

Not to worry. I know there is always a tendency to jump the gun on these things and to get one's druthers in at the beginning. I have a theory about most human projects and activities and it is this: the biggest mistakes on a project are usually made in the first five minutes of the project's life and one spends the rest of the time trying to undo those initial errors. In the case of Hemisfair, it's been belts and suspenders for over forty years. Thoughtful, carefully considered action is ALWAYS better than just plain "action". Hopefully, we will have thoughtful action here.

Hopefully. I also hope that this action includes consideration to DT as a whole and the needs it has now and will have in the future. I would hate for this to just be a new "belt" and be outdated in 15 years.

I'm glad to see that you guys are hopeful, but remember the city just finished the major screw-up called the Grand Hyatt. So there are no signs that this is going to happen.

The city needs to step back and actully look at what they have in the area and what can they do to make it more functional. They have the convention center, the park and the alamo dome. They should be using the dome for more convention center business. They should plan to incorporate the adjacent park into convention center space. Have a real expansion plan.

Abandon the idea of using the old SAWS lot. That area would be perfect for a major transportation and parking hub. It's on or near the major east/west downtown roads, next to the highway(s) and near a possible rail line at St.Paul Square.

Hemisfair Park is absolutely wrong for residential. Would you want to live on city owned property? Don't sell to the private sector and use the green space as an asset.

Imagine a giant courtyard/plaza with the convention center expanding along the streets. Having some retail and restaurant space facing the park.

I just saw on the news that the city is going foward with Hemsifair redevelopment. It wants to make the park a magnet for shopping, living etc. Thats how KENS 5 worded it. Hopefully we will see some new talls there.

Future Action
 

Whether or not or how the City decides to proceed with HemisFair is likely to be up to the new mayor and city council unless the council acts on May 21st to authorize some first steps.

So this is what came out of the third Hemisfair Reinitialization workshop.

http://www.nowcastsa.com/sites/defau...fairgame_0.jpg

Here is an aerial from google earth of the general area at about the same angle.

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/9562/hemisfair.png

Also to note, Andres Andujar has been named the CEO of the HemisFair Park Area Redevelopment Corporation Board.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/clockin...names-new-ceo/

Good job there!

are the green "blocks" green space?

So they want to move the Institute of Texas Cultures?

Yes they are.

It seems to still be there... that big red block surrounded by all the blue. What I've noticed is missing is the old wing of the convention center that was built with the original Hemisfair Park in 1968. Looks like they want to make it park space (a good thing) and extend the convention center toward the highway.

Correct. They want to tear down that section and put park space and another convention center hotel.

Any plans to incorporate traffic calming on Commerce St? Seems like that would help to connect this proposed green space with the River east of S Alamo. I can't imagine reconfiguring the convention center would result in an overall loss of floor space, but it also seems a little inconsistent with the goal of expanding the space, and this would leave it with nowhere to go but over the freeway.

The vision for Durango looks great. If I'm reading it right they want to line it with residential, effectively extending the Victoria Commons area? Lastly, whether by design or just coincidentally, the ToA has been made much more central to the rest of the park, rather than sitting on the periphery with nothing much going on around it. Mixed-use areas need strong anchors, and the fact that they used an existing and universally recognized anchor speaks to the amount of thought that went into the plan.

Maybe they'll build the hotel they should have built in the first place (probably not).

I dont think its green space because its all convention center where there is green blocks.

I want it to be all urban with the energy of time square. There doesn't need to be green space, maybe a li'l is okay.

I understand your sentiment, Paul, but the old wing of the convention center isn't at all like Time Square. TS is full of shops and lights and tall buildings and is constantly full of people. The south side of the convention center is (if I remember correctly) a long series of windows and maybe a covered walkway. It has no store fronts, no entrances to office buildings or hotels and is one of the areas with the lowest amount of pedestrian traffic flow. I think building a new modern wing of the convention center and creating lots of green space (a la Central park or the mall in DC) would be really nice for downtown San Antonio, and it would actually create more of a people-friendly area than currently exists. Imagine throwing a frisbee with the Tower of the Americas to look up at and the Riverwalk a few steps away. San Antonio needs more green space... this would be the perfect place for it.

Yes it's green space. Plans are to raze that area of the CC and build an expansion towards 37.

I'll take green space downtown over a manufactured mini times square.

Agreed. Hemisfair is the last place downtown we can get any large green space at all, whereas there are tons of parking lots to develop elsewhere.

I like the idea of a high rise at that corner. I also dreamed that corner would be a good place for our new performing arts center. Instead of remodeling the Municipal Auditorium.

I know right! Remember the old Sheratin Hotel design back in the 90's that would have been nice.

They should build a tram, just like the old swiss sky ride that ran through hemisphere back in 1968.:tup:

We need one of these babys at hemisfair! To take people from the riverwalk to the Tower!!!!!http://www.flickr.com/photos/fossilmike/2643508639/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fossilmike/2643508639/

Sorry it didn't let me post a picture.:shrug:

Castro speaks of a 24 hour downtown. Hemisfair would be one area that could pull that off. Several intimate pocket parts throughout Hemisfair would be better than it be mostly green space. A linear park trail throughout the park would work also. I'd rather see it built up to its maximum potential, residential high rises, retail, cultural, civic, etc. I also envision a world class museum and possibly a Aquarium, maybe a Sea World affiliation of some sort.

Yes it would have.

http://lizacrespo.com/images/sanantonio.gif

A aquarium downtown would make downtown a 24 hour downtown?

Great urban centers have green spaces, and Hemisfair Park is the perfect spot for such a thing.

It's not like they envision the entire space to be green. Look at the site plans, there's enough land for creating a dense and urban district that is full of vitality. The green space will only add to that.

:( memories

Not just an Aquarium, but it would still be a major attraction, it was the site of a worlds fair and needs something on that scale to draw in the crowds.

Overall I want it to look like a mini manhattan. An aquarium would draw more of the tourist component, and with dense residential, commercial on and around hemisfar would give it the potential to become a 24 hour district. Yea park space is needed but not the focus, imo. It is mostly all park space now and is overwhelmingy unused.

All nice things, but don't misunderestimate the importance of green space in an urban area. People are human and need green space to keep their sanity when they live in an urban area. Living in New York I speak from experience. Once the land is built up with highrises the opportunity to use it for green space is gone forever. Plus, if all that land is deemed green, it puts the rest of the land downtown at a greater premium and all those parking lots suddenly look like better and better places to build up.

We don't need anymore "tourist" attractions downtown. Downtown needs to stop going in that direction and go in the direction of attracting local residents to live, work and play.

A green space with residential space next to it is ten times better than some lame faux times square.

I know how hard headed you are with your opinions so there really isn't any use in my arguing my point with you but that is my point.

Downtown for too long has catered to the tourist market and relied on tourists. Now is the time to catered to locals who want to live downtown or go downtown for "non-tourist" things to do.

I'm afraid that Aquarium would hurt Sea Worlds business. Since Sea World is way out west, I wouldn't want tourist to just pick the Aquarium over taking that $25 taxi ride out to suburbs. I would like to see Ripley Believe it or not move out from across the Alamo, and maybe set up shop in Hemisfair.