HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted May 3, 2022, 10:39 PM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
‘Not a good sign’: Bexar commissioners split, vote to allow Spurs to host additional home games outside AT&T Center

https://www.expressnews.com/sports/s...e-17144998.php

Bexar County commissioners narrowly agreed to amend the Spurs’ non-relocation contract, allowing the team to play twice as many home games away from the AT&T Center.

But they supported the change Tuesday for only one year, and commissioners sternly suggested the team bring its leaders back in two weeks when the contract amendment will be up for a vote.

The amendment would allow the Spurs to play four home games at different locations — one in Mexico City, one at the Alamodome and two others within a 100-mile radius, rather than on the team’s home court at the county-owned AT&T Center.

The Spurs had asked for a two-year pilot program that could include two games at the Moody Center in Austin. But after discussing the matter during an executive session that ran more than an hour, commissioners felt they needed more time to study the issue. Under the 2000 non-relocation agreement, which runs through 2032, the Spurs can play only two home games away from the arena or face a huge penalty — $130 million this year.
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted May 4, 2022, 12:05 AM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 1,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingkirbythe.... View Post
‘Not a good sign’: Bexar commissioners split, vote to allow Spurs to host additional home games outside AT&T Center

https://www.expressnews.com/sports/s...e-17144998.php

Bexar County commissioners narrowly agreed to amend the Spurs’ non-relocation contract, allowing the team to play twice as many home games away from the AT&T Center.

But they supported the change Tuesday for only one year, and commissioners sternly suggested the team bring its leaders back in two weeks when the contract amendment will be up for a vote.

The amendment would allow the Spurs to play four home games at different locations — one in Mexico City, one at the Alamodome and two others within a 100-mile radius, rather than on the team’s home court at the county-owned AT&T Center.

The Spurs had asked for a two-year pilot program that could include two games at the Moody Center in Austin. But after discussing the matter during an executive session that ran more than an hour, commissioners felt they needed more time to study the issue. Under the 2000 non-relocation agreement, which runs through 2032, the Spurs can play only two home games away from the arena or face a huge penalty — $130 million this year.
I really wouldn't be too concerned. Teams in every major sport have been doing more of this. It's a great way for a smaller market team like San Antonio to expand their reach (especially one that already appeals to the international market historically). I honestly don't think the NBA would let the Spurs leave. More likely for the NBA too look for ground up new franchises when cities like Vegas and Seattle grab teams
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted May 5, 2022, 3:58 AM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
EVO Entertainment will open 12-screen theater and entertainment venue on San Antonio's South

https://www.sacurrent.com/arts/luxur...-side-28812524

Austin-based cinema-entertainment chain EVO Entertainment Group will open a new, 12-screen location on San Antonio's South Side.

EVO Entertainment Group will develop the location at South Park Mall for a planned December opening date. In addition to the movie screens, the facility will include with dine-in service, a bowling alley, number cars and a virtual reality experience.

The chain operates six locations throughout Texas, including New Braunfels, Schertz and Fredericksburg. The South Side location will be its first in the Alamo City proper.

“This was the perfect opportunity to join a community we’ve been watching for a while now,” EVO Entertainment CEO Mitchell Roberts said in an emailed statement. “San Antonio’s South Side is one of the most vibrant, active and rapidly growing areas in the city, and we’re thrilled to bring quality family entertainment to the neighborhood.”

The South Side EVO will employ roughly 175 people, according to the company.
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted May 6, 2022, 4:36 PM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
San Antonio picks up speed in auto industry

https://www.expressnews.com/sa-inc/a...y-17152156.php

For years, San Antonio city leaders had tried and failed.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, they wanted to bring an automotive plant to the region — the gold standard in economic development, a win that could generate thousands of jobs and boost tax revenue.

But it wasn’t working. Automotive supply lines at the time were centered on Detroit and other parts of the Midwest, not South Texas. Automakers such as Saturn, Mercedes-Benz and Hyundai all rebuffed San Antonio’s recruitment pitches.

And then Toyota came along.
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted May 6, 2022, 7:45 PM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
Why Are the Spurs Playing Footsie With Austin?

https://www.texasmonthly.com/arts-en...-games-austin/

The team's request to play more "home" games away from the AT&T Center raised familiar fears that San Antonio could lose its NBA franchise.

Forgive the thought, but every now and then it seems as if the San Antonio Spurs have been living on borrowed time in the Alamo City for the past 35 years. Their departure felt imminent back in the eighties—right up until a seven-foot-one graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy named David Robinson arrived at the end of the decade and kick-started the Spurs’ transformation into one of the most successful franchises in NBA history.

Then, in 1999, the organization again seemed to have one foot out the door when San Antonio voters first rejected then approved the construction of the $186 million AT&T Center. Thus ended the Spurs’ talks of possible relocation to Nashville or Anaheim. The team had won the first of its five NBA championships five months before the election that okayed the arena, and somewhere in that story there’s a reminder about the importance of timing.

Anyway, here we go again. The Spurs have not threatened to leave San Antonio this time. They don’t need to. Instead, they asked for—and received—permission from Bexar County commissioners to play two home games in Austin next season. Specifically, the franchise outlined a “two-year pilot program” regarding Austin. Amid the stirring of some familiar and understandable insecurities within one of the NBA’s smallest markets, commissioners approved only the two games for next season (in addition to one in Mexico City and another in the Alamodome).
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted May 10, 2022, 4:25 AM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
CityScrapes: San Antonio lacks transparency with Grand Hyatt deal and convention center expansion

Why don't San Antonians have access to the information needed to assess whether the Grand Hyatt hotel deal or convention center expansions made sense?

Editors Note: CityScrapes is a column of opinion and analysis.

https://www.sacurrent.com/news/citys...nsion-28801560

San Antonio's city government is open and clear about some things. The annual budget numbers are laid out for everyone to see, for example, and the specific projects on the big bond issue package up for a vote this month are spelled out.

But much is far murkier. Take for example the recent deal to "sell" the Grand Hyatt hotel. It took considerable effort to get beyond the city staff talking points to find out that Hyatt Corp. was being paid some $140 million to take the underperforming hotel off the city's books. Also less than clear was that the living-wage requirement, negotiated by COPS/Metro Alliance as part of the original hotel deal, would evaporate with the new deal and a new bond issue. And that the most secure of those bonds, the "senior lien" debt, carried a 5% annual interest rate — an unusually high return reflecting the risk of the deal.

It's easy to see how those details got lost in the shuffle. City staff argued that volatility in the bond market made it imperative that city council approve the deal just days after it was put on the agenda for the March 3 meeting. Interestingly, however, the bonds didn't sell until April 20.

When the Grand Hyatt deal was finally put out to the bond market, the "official statement" that documented the bond issue carried more interesting information — details that weren't made public when the "sale" was first announced. For example, the appraisal report put the current value of the hotel at $407 million — a figure far greater than the outstanding debt of $168 million. The appraisal also put the value of the hotel once its performance is expected to stabilize — January 2025 — at $459 million. All of which raise the question of why we were in such a rush to dispose of the Grand Hyatt when the city might have been able to get a better deal down the road.

It would have been nice if the public had been able to see those appraisals before city council made its decision.

But undoubtedly the most striking new information in the official statement wasn't about the hotel — it was about the performance of the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center.

For decades, we've been told that the convention center is an "economic engine," vital to the success of our tourism economy and downtown. So, we have dutifully invested in the center, completing an expansion in 2001 and another in 2016.

Then, of course, the city went into the hotel business with the Grand Hyatt, bolstered by a consultant study that promised it would yield a significant increase in convention business. And to keep the conventions and high-profile sports events coming, we discounted the rent for the center — called "hosting obligations" — and gave away millions in public dollars to gatherings such as the People en Español Festival.

But the Grand Hyatt document paints a rather different picture of the convention center as an economic engine.

In 2017, the facility's convention attendance came to 396,785, according to details in the filing. The next year hit 431,492. But for 2019, convention attendance dropped to 365,850.

To put those recent, pre-COVID figures in perspective, we can go back to November 1990, when Arthur Andersen LLP produced an "Expansion Feasibility Analysis" of the HBG Convention Center. The consulting company reported that the venue hosted 336,966 convention delegates in 1989 in the wake of an earlier expansion. Arthur Andersen then offered the forecast that with yet another expansion — the one completed in 2001 — the center would see 662,000 annual convention attendees.

When the Arthur Andersen consultants returned a year later with an "Economic Impact Analysis," they were even more optimistic about the future of San Antonio's convention business, pegging future attendance at 728,000.

It didn't quite happen. Indeed, the 2019 convention attendance total of 365,850 is remarkably close the 336,966 reported for 1989 — yes, 30 years earlier.

But you — or councilmembers — wouldn't know that from looking at the performance metrics regularly reported by the city. The most recent city budget highlights performance measures for the convention center as its exhibit hall occupancy level and number of hosted events. But actual convention attendance is nowhere to be found.

The city's annual continuing disclosure report to the bond market also shies away from detailing the convention center's attendance levels. The document includes figures on the number of conventions, convention attendance and convention room nights at local hotels. But those totals aren't for the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center. They're for every convention booked in San Antonio — perhaps eight or 10 times more than occur at the convention center.

So, why don't San Antonians have an accurate picture of how our massive investment in the convention center is actually performing, year after year? Why don't we have access to the information needed to assess whether the Grand Hyatt hotel, or the successive expansions, worked and met the forecasts? And how could we possibly assess a future expansion proposal without knowing what happened before?

Perhaps it's because our elected officials prefer not to ask those kinds of difficult and uncomfortable questions. And perhaps because City Hall staffers choose not to provide information that might be less than flattering about the realities of the city's policies and economic realities.

Heywood Sanders is a professor of public policy at the University of Texas at San Antonio.
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted May 10, 2022, 10:27 PM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
Spurs owner’s open letter: ‘The Spurs are in San Antonio to stay’

https://sanantonioreport.org/san-ant...t-open-letter/

A week after the San Antonio Spurs asked Bexar County commissioners to play more “home” games away from the AT&T Center, team owner Peter J. Holt sought to reassure fans and local leaders Tuesday, posting an open letter saying the team is not moving away from San Antonio.

Spurs officials last week requested permission to play games during the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 seasons in Austin and in Mexico City with the Spurs as the home team. Bexar County owns the AT&T Center and the Spurs’ lease says the team cannot play more than two home games outside of the county during any one season.

After Spurs Sports & Entertainment General Counsel Bobby Perez told commissioners the team was looking to expand its fan base, concerns arose that the Spurs were eyeing Austin as an eventual home.

“I want to reassure you that the Spurs are in San Antonio to stay,” wrote Holt, the Spurs’ managing partner. “… The Spurs are as much a part of San Antonio as San Antonio is a part of the Spurs.”
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted May 11, 2022, 6:38 PM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
Edwards Aquifer the lowest it’s been in four years

https://www.expressnews.com/news/loc...l-17162807.php

The Edwards Aquifer’s level is the lowest it has been since 2018, and without significant rain, it will continue to drop through the spring and into the summer.

On Tuesday, the Edwards Aquifer Authority marked the aquifer at 646.4 feet, nearly 15 feet below what’s considered a healthy and sustainable level. Since the beginning of the year, the San Antonio region has not received enough rain to keep the aquifer level stable. Although some small storms have filled the underground karst system with recharge, drought conditions have prevented the aquifer from rebounding completely.

“We’ve been fortunate the last few years to have decent rainfall, and it’s not infrequent for it to fall into Stage 1 or Stage 2 for at least part of the summer,” said Paul Bertetti, senior director of aquifer science and modeling at the Edwards Aquifer Authority, referring to the levels of restrictions implemented to conserve water. “But what is a little bit unusual is that we’re in Stage 2 so early in the year, without any anticipated rainfall.”
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted May 13, 2022, 1:10 AM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
High ozone days during COVID lockdowns show nonlocal pollution affects local air quality, agency tells EPA

https://sanantonioreport.org/high-oz...o-air-quality/

Despite decreased road emissions across San Antonio during the early days of COVID-19, Bexar County still experienced more high-ozone days in the spring of 2020 than it did the previous year.

That is proof that pollution generated outside of the county is wafting in and negatively affecting San Antonio’s air quality, according to the local agency responsible for air quality monitoring.
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted May 13, 2022, 6:41 PM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
Historic Palace Livery Stable turned Artes Graficas print shop sold to San Antonio real estate firm

https://saheron.com/palace-livery-st...graficas-sold/

A local entrepreneur plans to move the headquarters of his real estate firm into the historic Palace Livery Stable building at 115 Camaron St., which overlooks San Pedro Creek across from the Alameda Theater, after purchasing it last week.

About 20 employees of the firm, DJE Texas Management Group, which invests in multifamily developments across San Antonio, will move into the three-story, 7,175-square-foot building in late summer, said Devin Elder, its principal and founder.

...

The city has designated the building as a historic landmark, identifying it with the name “Artes Graficas.”

Elder said he plans to remodel the interior, but that overall the building is in good shape, having been renovated in the last decade or so.

He declined to share how much his firm paid for the building. The Bexar Appraisal District valued it at $997,000 this year.
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted May 16, 2022, 2:13 AM
Spoiler's Avatar
Spoiler Spoiler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 926
I hate to say it, but I think the ITC site is the best location for a downtown arena. Right next to the convention center and Alamodome (actually, tearing down the Alamodome and putting the arena there would be best, but that's never gonna happen), plenty of parking at the Alamodome, connectivity to the rest of downtown with the Hemisfair redevelopment. The ITC could relocate to the west end of downtown at the new UTSA campus. Change my mind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted May 16, 2022, 3:28 AM
theOGalexd theOGalexd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoiler View Post
I hate to say it, but I think the ITC site is the best location for a downtown arena. Right next to the convention center and Alamodome (actually, tearing down the Alamodome and putting the arena there would be best, but that's never gonna happen), plenty of parking at the Alamodome, connectivity to the rest of downtown with the Hemisfair redevelopment. The ITC could relocate to the west end of downtown at the new UTSA campus. Change my mind.
Might be right with that one. I'd say that or whatever that abandoned looking building/lot is next to SAMA. Who knows what land will be available in 5-8 years tho lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted May 16, 2022, 4:14 AM
Onward's Avatar
Onward Onward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoiler View Post
I hate to say it, but I think the ITC site is the best location for a downtown arena. Right next to the convention center and Alamodome (actually, tearing down the Alamodome and putting the arena there would be best, but that's never gonna happen), plenty of parking at the Alamodome, connectivity to the rest of downtown with the Hemisfair redevelopment. The ITC could relocate to the west end of downtown at the new UTSA campus. Change my mind.
Agreed, I've always thought the Institute of Texan Cultures location made the most sense. Around the Pearl would be ideal, but that ship has sailed I believe. Institute of Texan Cultures would also work on one of those parking lots behind the Crockett Hotel. Right near the Alamo and its new Museum. I believe the new stadium belongs downtown. But If they can get enough land 1604/I-10 or 1604/281 I could see as well.

Hopefully lessons were learned from the AT&T Center. It's a horrible game experience. Even the likes of Memphis or OKC offer more. Truly don't know what they were expecting with that location. SFH homes, a Golf Course, and light industrial. It was never going to become a destination or entertainment zone.

Last edited by Onward; May 16, 2022 at 5:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted May 16, 2022, 4:32 PM
Fireoutofclay's Avatar
Fireoutofclay Fireoutofclay is offline
Weapon of Mass Creation
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texan101 View Post
Agreed, I've always thought the Institute of Texan Cultures location made the most sense. Around the Pearl would be ideal, but that ship has sailed I believe. Institute of Texan Cultures would also work on one of those parking lots behind the Crockett Hotel. Right near the Alamo and its new Museum. I believe the new stadium belongs downtown. But If they can get enough land 1604/I-10 or 1604/281 I could see as well.

Hopefully lessons were learned from the AT&T Center. It's a horrible game experience. Even the likes of Memphis or OKC offer more. Truly don't know what they were expecting with that location. SFH homes, a Golf Course, and light industrial. It was never going to become a destination or entertainment zone.
The Spurs chose that location. After leaving Hemisfair Arena for the Alamodome, it was understood that they would only be there for a few years while new home would be made for them later. Then the city (Mayor Howard Peak) and the county (Judge Cyndi Krier) offered competing plans. They chose the county's plan to build on the grounds of the Freeman Coliseum over the city's plan of building next to the Alamodome. They threw their support over the plan that benefited them more.

I was a teenager at the time, so the details escape me, but I didn't understand why the city and county couldn't come together on a plan that was mutually beneficial.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted May 16, 2022, 10:20 PM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireoutofclay View Post

I was a teenager at the time, so the details escape me, but I didn't understand why the city and county couldn't come together on a plan that was mutually beneficial.
Because people in positions of power often like to wave their um... "sticks" around and call attention to themselves whether it benefits the people or not.
__________________
Hi.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted May 16, 2022, 3:30 PM
Keegan-B-SATX Keegan-B-SATX is offline
TEXAS BORN AND RAISED
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 32
I agree with your statement 100%. The Institute of Texan Cultures building is a fantastic location. I heard someone mention in this thread that taxpayers wouldnt approve the funds for an Arena. The arena would be payed for by hotel occupancy taxes and convention fees not tax dollars. That's why I mentioned earlier that in order to accumulate the necessary funds the city should start saving the money now. That way in about 5-6 years when arena talk gets more likely the money will be there. Especially when in 2025 we'll be hosting the final four again. That's hundreds of millions of potential dollars the city can save.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted May 16, 2022, 12:49 PM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,874
I agree with all the assessments above. When I was a kid I went to Spurs games at the Hemisfair Arena. It was right there. We parked across the street (in the garage that is amazingly still there) and walked through that long, big hallway through the convention center passing what was later named the Lila Cockrell Theater, after San Antonio's first female mayor. Before or after a game you could go to the Riverwalk or other downtown bars and restaurants, or up the Tower of the Americas, or take your visiting relatives to the Alamo for the 47th time. The location was perfect, and could be again with the right planning on multiple parts.
__________________
Hi.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted May 17, 2022, 1:50 AM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
James
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 2,473
Build it on a lot next to the Alamodome. Build a garage first. Then the arena. Then another garage. Done.

Long-term connectivity would be tear down 37 between Florida/Carolina to Brooklyn/Nolan.

OR the ITC. I've been saying for years one of the lots behind the Alamo would be perfect.

Who has several hundred million lying around for us to get this going?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted May 18, 2022, 1:49 PM
SAguy SAguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 526
Bexar County leader pushes for redevelopment around AT&T Center, sans a housing-prices spike

https://www.kens5.com/article/news/l...tag1=kensshare
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted May 20, 2022, 2:52 PM
Keep-SA-Lame's Avatar
Keep-SA-Lame Keep-SA-Lame is offline
COGSADCAJA- Publicist
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 1,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAguy View Post
Bexar County leader pushes for redevelopment around AT&T Center, sans a housing-prices spike

https://www.kens5.com/article/news/l...tag1=kensshare
It's totally bananas that this wasn't the original plan. We just tossed the AT&T center out there surrounded by a sea of parking and just kind of hoped some development happened around it. Glad someone is at least thinking about it, better late than never. Between the arenas and that shitty golf course across the street, there's a ton of public land there that could host a ton of desperately needed housing. It could be San Antonio's Mueller. The best part is because it's surrounded on three sides by a sea of industrial uses, you could probably just do whatever you want without offending the NIMBYs.
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:12 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.