HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > San Antonio

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2009, 2:55 PM
texboy texboy is online now
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,348
Is it just me or does it look like there are condos at the base?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2009, 5:51 PM
Paul in S.A TX's Avatar
Paul in S.A TX Paul in S.A TX is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Far West Bexar County
Posts: 3,546
I doubt they would put condos at the base of a hotel. It's usually the other way around.
__________________
2018 S. A. Pop.1.51 million
metro 2.5 million/REGION 4.7million
San Antonio economy and largest economic sectors. Annual contribution towards GDP.
U.S. Dept of Defense $48.5 billion/Manufacturing $40.5 billion/Healthcare-Biosciences $40 billion/Finance-Insurance $20 billion/Tourism $15 billion/ Technology $10 billion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2009, 6:45 PM
tgannaway89 tgannaway89 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Midland/San Antonio
Posts: 379
The third image shows the plans for the building by floor. I see that food service, a lobby, and administrative occupy the first 4 levels. 5-22 are guest rooms while floors 23 and 24 call for the pool and spa. No condos .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2009, 8:08 PM
Texas Tuff's Avatar
Texas Tuff Texas Tuff is offline
Squint Like Clint
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Abilene, Texas
Posts: 1,064
This new proposal looks great! It's very contemporary looking and I think it would be a very nice addition to the skyline.
__________________
"It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress" - Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2009, 8:21 PM
sakyle04's Avatar
sakyle04 sakyle04 is offline
COGSADCAJA, VP and CGO
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: 78201
Posts: 1,369
just returned from ninevah (rural kansas) and found this.

what?!?!?!

wow.
__________________
PAVE PARADISE, PUT UP A (HIGH-RISE ON A) PARKING LOT...
Kyle on Twitter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2009, 12:17 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 7,400
At first I didn't really like this building because it's just a little above average in the design department (and I said that in another thread). But what the hell? It's better than the Holiday Inn. Build the damned thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2009, 6:14 AM
adtobias adtobias is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 285
maybe they can add some condo on floor 24-34
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2009, 9:22 PM
kornbread kornbread is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 807
Quote:
Originally Posted by adtobias View Post
maybe they can add some condo on floor 24-34
I'm sure a lot of effort and research helped them decide what they should do with this property.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2009, 10:22 PM
sirkingwilliam's Avatar
sirkingwilliam sirkingwilliam is offline
Loving SA 365 days a year
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 3,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by kornbread View Post
I'm sure a lot of effort and research helped them decide what they should do with this property.
Yep.

The developers did a lot of market research.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 3:52 PM
miaht82's Avatar
miaht82 miaht82 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Triangle
Posts: 1,316
ON the agenda again;
Quote:
REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for Conceptual Approval to:
1. Demolish building at 161 E Commerce
The accompanying exhibits provide additional information.
HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION
Agenda Item No: 22
IDENTIFIER: Old Sullivan Building
March 04, 2009
ZONING: D HE RIO-3
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff does not recommend approval of the proposed demolition. The structure at 161 E. Commerce is a local
Historic Exceptional landmark. The applicant has not provided staff with the requirements for Unreasonable
Economic Hardship or Unusual and Compelling Circumstances. Staff would like to point out that permits for
demolition and construction shall be issued simultaneously if requirements of section 35-609, new
construction, are met, and the property owner provides financial proof of his ability to complete the project.
Also, after the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness, permits must be pulled within 180 days.
The following section of the UDC describes the requirements.
Sec. 35-614. Demolition
(1) Exceptional Historic Landmark. No certificate shall be issued for demolition of an exceptional historic
landmark unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the historic and design review commission
clear and convincing evidence that an unreasonable economic hardship would be imposed on the applicant if
the application for a certificate is disapproved.
The applicant has not provided evidence of unreasonable economic hardship as described below:
(b) Unreasonable Economic Hardship.
(1) Generally. The historic and design review commission shall be guided in its decision by balancing the
historic, architectural, cultural and/or archaeological value of the particular landmark or eligible landmark
against the special merit of the proposed replacement project.
(2) Burden of Proof. When a claim of unreasonable economic hardship is made due to the effect of this
article, the owner must prove that he cannot realize a reasonable rate of return upon the value of his property.
(3) Criteria. The public benefits obtained from retaining the cultural resource must be analyzed and duly
considered by the historic and design review commission. The historic and design review commission shall
apply the test utilized by the Supreme Court of Texas in construing Article I, Section 17 of the Constitution of
the State of Texas, 1876, as amended, in determining the existence of an unreasonable economic hardship.
The owner shall submit, by affidavit to the historic preservation officer for transmittal to a constituted
COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1
2009-053
committee of the historic and design review commission for evaluation and recommendation to the full
historic and design review commission, at least the following information:
A. The assessed value of the land and improvements thereon according to the two (2) most recent
assessments, including any appeal adjusting value temporarily;
B. Real estate taxes for the previous five (5) years;
C. The date of purchase of the property or other means of acquisition of title, such as by gift or inheritance,
and the party from whom purchased or otherwise acquired;
D. Annual debt service, if any, for the previous five (5) years;
E. All appraisals obtained within the previous five (5) years by the owner or applicant in connection with his
purchase, financing or ownership of the property;
F. Any listing of the property for sale or rent, price asked and offers received; if any;
G. Any consideration by the owner as to profitable adaptive uses for the property;
H. Replacement construction plans for the landmark in question;
I. Financial proof of the ability to complete the replacement project which may include but not be limited to
a performance bond, a letter of credit, a trust for completion of improvements, or a letter of commitment from
a financial institution;
J. The current fair market value of the property, as determined by at least two (2) independent appraisals
made by appraisers with competent credentials.
K. In the event that any of the required information is not reasonably available to the applicant and cannot be
obtained by the applicant, the applicant shall file with his affidavit a statement of the information which
cannot be obtained and shall describe the reasons why such information cannot be obtained.
(4) Additional Criteria for Income Producing Properties. In addition, if the property is income producing:
A. Annual gross income from the property for the previous five (5) years;
B. Itemized operating and maintenance expenses for the previous five (5) years, including proof that
adequate and competent management procedures were followed;
C. Annual cash flow, if any, for the previous five (5) years; and
D. Proof that efforts have been made by the owner to obtain a reasonable return on his investment based on
previous service.
(c) Unusual and Compelling Circumstances and Demolition of a Significant Historic Landmark. When an
applicant fails to prove unreasonable economic hardship in the case of a significant historic landmark, the
applicant may provide to the historic and design review commission additional information which may show
unusual and compelling circumstances in order to receive historic and design review commission
recommendation of approval of the certificate as to the demolition of the significant historic landmark. The
historic and design review commission, using criteria set forth in this article, shall determine whether unusual
and compelling circumstances exist and shall be guided in its recommendation in such instances by the
following additional considerations:
(1) The historic or architectural significance of the building, object, site, or structure;
(2) The importance of the building, object, site, or structure to the integrity and character of a historic district;
(3) The importance of the building, object, site, or structure as part of a cluster within the historic district;
(4) The difficulty or the impossibility of reproducing such a building, object, site, or structure because of its
design, texture, material, detail, or unique location;
(5) Whether the building, object, site, or structure is one (1) of the last remaining examples of its kind in the
neighborhood, the city, county, region, state, or nation;
(6) Whether there are definite plans for reuse of the property if the proposed demolition is carried out, and
what effect such plans will have on the architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological, social, aesthetic, or
environmental character of the surrounding area as outlined in subsection 35-803(b) of this chapter as well as
the economic impact of the new development;
(7) Whether reasonable measures can be taken to save the building, object, site, structure, or cluster from
further deterioration, collapse, arson, vandalism or neglect; and
(8) Whether reasonable measures can be taken to relocate the building, object, structure to a new site.
For property located within a historic district, the historic and design review commission shall be guided in its
decision by balancing the contribution of the property to the character of the historic district with the special
merit of the proposed replacement project.
(d) Documentation and Strategy.
2009-053
CASE COMMENTS:
(1) Applicants that have received a recommendation for a certificate shall document buildings, objects, sites
or structures which are intended to be demolished with 35mm slides or prints, preferably in black and white,
and supply a set of slides or prints to the historic preservation officer.
(2) Applicants shall also prepare for the historic preservation officer a salvage strategy for reuse of building
materials deemed valuable by the historic preservation officer for other preservation and restoration activities.
(3) Applicants that have received an approval of a certificate regarding demolition shall be permitted to
receive a demolition permit without additional commission action on demolition, following the commission's
recommendation of a certificate for new construction. Permits for demolition and construction shall be issued
simultaneously if requirements of section 35-609, new construction, are met, and the property owner provides
financial proof of his ability to complete the project.
(4) When the commission recommends approval of a certificate for buildings, objects, sites, or structures
designated landmarks, permits shall not be issued until all plans for the site have received approval from all
appropriate city boards, commissions, departments and agencies.
(e) Issuance of Permit. When the commission recommends approval of a certificate regarding demolition of
buildings, objects, sites, or structures in historic districts, permits shall not be issued until all plans for the site
have received approval from all appropriate city boards, commissions, departments and agencies.
(h) Scope of Approval. A certificate of appropriateness shall authorize only those modifications to a building
or structure requested in the application and approved as provided herein. Following commission approval of
final design, defined as eighty (80) percent working drawings, and issuance of a certificate, an applicant must
secure permits within one hundred eighty (180) days and start work within one hundred eighty (180) days of
issuance of permits or the certificate becomes null and void and of no force or effect. Thereafter, the applicant
must reapply for reissuance of a certificate to the historic preservation officer. The historic preservation
officer will determine whether significant changes have occurred to the final design. If the historic
preservation officer determines that significant changes have occurred, then plans must be resubmitted to the
commission for rehearing and action.
2009
__________________
The Raleigh Connoisseur
It is the city trying to escape the consequences of being a city
while still remaining a city. It is urban society trying to eat its
cake and keep it, too.
- Harlan Douglass, The Suburban Trend, 1925
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 4:10 PM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 2,211
this time they are just requesting demolition of the fish market building, is any real significance to attend, because I'm uncertain
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 7:28 PM
sakyle04's Avatar
sakyle04 sakyle04 is offline
COGSADCAJA, VP and CGO
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: 78201
Posts: 1,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by miaht82 View Post
ON the agenda again;
Have you seen this building recently?

It is in the process of demolishing itself!!!!

I walked by recently and picked up a stone the size of a basketball that had fallen "out of" the wall.

__________________
PAVE PARADISE, PUT UP A (HIGH-RISE ON A) PARKING LOT...
Kyle on Twitter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 8:03 PM
oldmanshirt's Avatar
oldmanshirt oldmanshirt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SATX > KCMO > DFW
Posts: 1,170
^^^Try kicking it a couple of times, or pay a homeless person to roll his shopping cart into it, maybe it'll just fall down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 8:21 PM
Paul in S.A TX's Avatar
Paul in S.A TX Paul in S.A TX is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Far West Bexar County
Posts: 3,546
I guess they wanna save historic pieces of crap too.
__________________
2018 S. A. Pop.1.51 million
metro 2.5 million/REGION 4.7million
San Antonio economy and largest economic sectors. Annual contribution towards GDP.
U.S. Dept of Defense $48.5 billion/Manufacturing $40.5 billion/Healthcare-Biosciences $40 billion/Finance-Insurance $20 billion/Tourism $15 billion/ Technology $10 billion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2009, 3:31 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
again
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: down the street from the taco trailer
Posts: 49,080
I wanted to wait to check this out until I got back, but wow. This could be really cool! Very nice skinny tower. Hopefully they'll pull "an Austin" and later announce that it'll be taller. With that skinny of a footprint, it could get really tall if they decided to add more space.
__________________
Smoke marijuana, not Americans.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2009, 5:28 AM
kornbread kornbread is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 807

Taller? It's a 24-story boutique hotel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 4:35 AM
BSofA04's Avatar
BSofA04 BSofA04 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 372
24 is good, but 34 would be better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 5:13 AM
adtobias adtobias is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 285
agree
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 5:59 PM
sakyle04's Avatar
sakyle04 sakyle04 is offline
COGSADCAJA, VP and CGO
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: 78201
Posts: 1,369
the recent HDRC stuff is not hopeful. still, if the right people want it to succeed, it will. any word on where we're needed JAGA?
__________________
PAVE PARADISE, PUT UP A (HIGH-RISE ON A) PARKING LOT...
Kyle on Twitter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 9:52 PM
Scottolini Scottolini is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by BSofA04 View Post
24 is good, but 34 would be better.
44 would be an improvement, yet why not 54. Ah hell, shoot for the stars! 64 floors is what it should be. Think about the publicity, the world's tallest "boutique hotel". Are you listening Starwood? San Antonio's market can support it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > San Antonio
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:20 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.