SAN ANTONIO | Suburban and Metro Development Thread

[miaht82]

Originally Posted by Schertz1

It's the guest house, a type of hotel for service members, on Ft. Sam.

I can't see pics from here at work but is it Old BAMC II? it was recently finished a few months back and is about 80% leased.

[tgannaway89]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

Tons of cities have....had growth like the San Antonio metro area. Why keep giving that area of the world excuses for the inability to plan a head and plan growth? Sorry....but when little attention is paid to the city....the inner core...which suffers on so many fronts from all the money going to build new...bigger...better...farther areas of the city...something is just plain wrong about that.

I don't think suburbia would mind paying for it via tolls, but that isn't going to happen. San Antonio and TXDOT will not fork out money for a good lawyer to keep from losing to the anti-toll critics in the lawsuits. All of the money.... all of the years wasted so far on 281. 1604, being comparable to the beltway 8 in Houston, is ideal for adding toll lanes. I just don't see it happening though. It isn't just suburbia using these highways though. SA gets over 20 million visitors each year who travel to Six Flags, Sea World, La Cantera, etc. It isn't like they are taking our lousy public transportation (a fleet of diesel buses to shuttle 2 million residents and endless tourists?) out there.

[Chicago3rd]

Originally Posted by tgannaway89

SA gets over 20 million visitors each year who travel to Six Flags, Sea World, La Cantera, etc. It isn't like they are taking our lousy public transportation (a fleet of diesel buses to shuttle 2 million residents and endless tourists?) out there.

Then have it paid for by a tourist tax. Why keep on encouraging things to be plopped way out in the middle of nothing if it is just going to force future generations to pay for the bad planning?

[Schertz1]

Originally Posted by miaht82

I can't see pics from here at work but is it Old BAMC II? it was recently finished a few months back and is about 80% leased.

No, different building.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

Tons of cities have....had growth like the San Antonio metro area. Why keep giving that area of the world excuses for the inability to plan a head and plan growth? Sorry....but when little attention is paid to the city....the inner core...which suffers on so many fronts from all the money going to build new...bigger...better...farther areas of the city...something is just plain wrong about that.

Agreed. I read some outsider views of San Antonio on the forum, and most are not positive. They talk about how sprawled out the city is and how dead downtown is (in relation to their city). And these are not comments from negative people. They aren't people who hate San Antonio or Texas either. They aren't making these comments to get a rise out of San Antonio forumers or Texans since they're talked about in places on the forum where most of the Texas forumers never even visit. They're not bashing the city, just commenting on it after visiting it. San Antonio's inner city is an incredible place, do it justice and don't let it be forgotten for areas around the city that years ago were just cow pastures. Do those or have those areas on the city's edge that years ago were ranch land and cow pasture ever added anything culturally to the city? Do they even do now, now that they've been developed into sprawling strip malls? I never go to San Antonio with those places in mind and they're never the places I want to see. I want to see downtown, and I want to see it thrive and be vibrant. I'm not saying those other areas can't exist either, it's unrealistic to say they can't or shouldn't, but I just don't want to see downtown and the inner city neglected. The city leaders need to remember where the heart and soul of the city is.

The same thing happens in Austin too. I've seen way more sprawl around Austin than I'd care to. But the city has also balanced that out and not neglected to pay attention to the inner city too. I know the demand is there in San Antonio too, it just needs to be jump started and promoted more.

[sirkingwilliam]

Originally Posted by Boquillas

Despite the residential growth DT, I still think more people in SA would prefer to live in Alamo Heights, and there's really no room to build low density residential in AH anymore.

Well, it won't be Alamo Heights and for a number of reasons. The most important being, like mentioned before, the height restrictions within AH. It's not only a couple of stories max, they're very very strict with stuff like that. Not to mention if you examine Broadway that runs through Alamo Heights, it's lined up with occupied commercial businesses. Anding any type of multiple story residential or office/commercial buildings would be tough. It would go against the AH image and it would cost soooo much.

I agree, a mid-rise and high-rise lined Broadway from Hildebrand Ave to the Central Loop would be fantastic. But it's going to be on SA land not Alamo or Terrell Hills.

Also, I think right now with BRAC, the city should be pushing for this like crazy. Doing the best they can. Talking with land owners and developers, offering tax incentives, offering up city owned land on the cheap, etc.

[miaht82]

Originally Posted by sirkingwilliam

Also, I think right now with BRAC, the city should be pushing for this like crazy. Doing the best they can. Talking with land owners and developers, offering tax incentives, offering up city owned land on the cheap, etc.

There will be about 4500-5000 permanent civilian/military and not all of them bring family members and not all of them want houses. The city keeps talking about this like if they know it is urgent, even putting up 5.5 million for BRAC projects, but when they set up the barriers, they made developers look the other way.
We have 19 months till BRAC projects are to be done and we start seeing people show up this time next year. Hopefully, like I said before, the completion of the Museum Reach will light a fire under people to get some dirt moving.

[oldmanshirt]

I don't know that you can say anyone is "neglecting" downtown or the inner city, its just a combination of factors. When downtown development is strangled by local regulations, hoops, and bureaucracy, on top of the already high price of land, and suburban development is encouraged through all sorts of local and state incentives and allowances, on top of the relatively cheap price of the land, of course developers are going to look outwards. The final straw is the demographics of the two areas. Compare the median incomes and discretionary spending of residents in 78205 vs the zip codes north and immediately south of 1604, and then try to look at things the way a developer would. This, of course, is a classic chicken-and-egg scenario, because you have to get folks with money to spend living downtown before you get the amenities, but they won't move down there if there's nothing but hotels and sit-down restaurants overrun with tourists.

And Kevin, I also frequently visit other sections of SSP, so I see the perceptions of outsiders through their comments in city discussions forum and other places. While most of what they say about SA is objective and accurate, there are also certain "mitigating factors" unique to this forum that color their perceptions negatively.

[tgannaway89]

Originally Posted by oldmanshirt

I don't know that you can say anyone is "neglecting" downtown or the inner city, its just a combination of factors. When downtown development is strangled by local regulations, hoops, and bureaucracy, on top of the already high price of land, and suburban development is encouraged through all sorts of local and state incentives and allowances, on top of the relatively cheap price of the land, of course developers are going to look outwards. The final straw is the demographics of the two areas. Compare the median incomes and discretionary spending of residents in 78205 vs the zip codes north and immediately south of 1604, and then try to look at things the way a developer would. This, of course, is a classic chicken-and-egg scenario, because you have to get folks with money to spend living downtown before you get the amenities, but they won't move down there if there's nothing but hotels and sit-down restaurants overrun with tourists.

And Kevin, I also frequently visit other sections of SSP, so I see the perceptions of outsiders through their comments in city discussions forum and other places. While most of what they say about SA is objective and accurate, there are also certain "mitigating factors" unique to this forum that color their perceptions negatively.

The North side may not be central to the highways but it is definitely the center of the $$$ in SA. Companies are going to build where the money is... 78257. San Antonio is a sprawly and very suburban friendly city. It's the SA I know and moved too.

[Chicago3rd]

^^^Then that money needs to build the freeways and infrastructure. We all know historically the money has been bleed off of the older part of the city to pay for the new and improved. Building sidewalks in business parks with taxpayer money...but often not having them in the city...where the tax payers live.

[tgannaway89]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

^^^Then that money needs to build the freeways and infrastructure. We all know historically the money has been bleed off of the older part of the city to pay for the new and improved. Building sidewalks in business parks with taxpayer money...but often not having them in the city...where the tax payers live.

I don't think anyone will disagree... but tolls aren't going to happen in SA. I'm not sure there is any other way to solely fund a highway by only those that use it.

[oldmanshirt]

They'll happen on 1604, and eventually they'll happen on 281, too.

San Antonians are always the last ones to get around to accepting reality, and in this case tolls are the preferred way of building new freeways in TX, and have been for some time now. SA has put them off this long, but likely won't be able to forever.

[miaht82]

Off topic;
Just a little FYI
Hardbergers "Mission Verde"

[miaht82]

from mysa.com

By Travis E. Poling - Express-News

USAA is consolidating its Sacramento, Calif., and Norfolk, Va., offices into other locations around the country. The end result will be about 1,000 more jobs at the San Antonio headquarters.

There will be no layoffs at the financial services company because all 1,100 workers effected in Virginia and California will be offered a chance to relocate to jobs in San Antonio, Phoenix, Colorado Springs and Tampa.

A company spokesman said generous relocation packages will be offered for those who do make the move and severance for those who decide to leave the company.

The decision was partly based on real estate expense. The USAA buildings in both locations had space for 5,000 more people than they needed.

[jaga185]

My dad told me this like 20min ago, I'm excited, I've been trying to apply with them for the past year. That's great news for our area.

[Paul in S.A TX]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

Tons of cities have....had growth like the San Antonio metro area. Why keep giving that area of the world excuses for the inability to plan a head and plan growth? Sorry....but when little attention is paid to the city....the inner core...which suffers on so many fronts from all the money going to build new...bigger...better...farther areas of the city...something is just plain wrong about that.

What about the 15 mile Riverwalk redevelopment and expansion? I'm sorry but there isn't anything on this size scale anywhere in the city, or probably Texas. It might not be all new ultra modern but faux projects, like on other parts of the city, but this is historic San Antonio, and those kinda projects can stay outside the inner core. What about River North, Hemisfair Park redevelopment, and projects in the other downtown districts? San Antonio a negelected inner core? I wouldn't disagree more. It does need work in some areas, but what city doesn't? Light rail would be beneficial, hope it comes up for vote again and passes this time around

[Dom"n"Converse]

Light rail would be beneficial, hope it comes up for vote again and passes this time around

It doesn't look like we'll be able to vote on that this May, or November, since the city can't figure out where to put the starter line, or if it should be light rail that would work very well in this city or commuter rail that would be a waste of money because they're trying to put it in an area with very little business. I wish they would tweak the 2000 plan and add lines to the north east side, the west side and 410; I think that would actually pass this time around...as long as there are accidents in the Stone Oak area that block all the voting sites during the hours of 4:30 to 8:00pm.

[PartyLine]

Originally Posted by sirkingwilliam

Well, it won't be Alamo Heights and for a number of reasons. The most important being, like mentioned before, the height restrictions within AH. It's not only a couple of stories max, they're very very strict with stuff like that. Not to mention if you examine Broadway that runs through Alamo Heights, it's lined up with occupied commercial businesses. Anding any type of multiple story residential or office/commercial buildings would be tough. It would go against the AH image and it would cost soooo much.

I agree, a mid-rise and high-rise lined Broadway from Hildebrand Ave to the Central Loop would be fantastic. But it's going to be on SA land not Alamo or Terrell Hills.

Also, I think right now with BRAC, the city should be pushing for this like crazy. Doing the best they can. Talking with land owners and developers, offering tax incentives, offering up city owned land on the cheap, etc.

To me it would make more sence to have more highrises off 410 kinda like 610 in Houston.

[PartyLine]

Originally Posted by oldmanshirt

I don't know that you can say anyone is "neglecting" downtown or the inner city, its just a combination of factors. When downtown development is strangled by local regulations, hoops, and bureaucracy, on top of the already high price of land, and suburban development is encouraged through all sorts of local and state incentives and allowances, on top of the relatively cheap price of the land, of course developers are going to look outwards. The final straw is the demographics of the two areas. Compare the median incomes and discretionary spending of residents in 78205 vs the zip codes north and immediately south of 1604, and then try to look at things the way a developer would. This, of course, is a classic chicken-and-egg scenario, because you have to get folks with money to spend living downtown before you get the amenities, but they won't move down there if there's nothing but hotels and sit-down restaurants overrun with tourists.

And Kevin, I also frequently visit other sections of SSP, so I see the perceptions of outsiders through their comments in city discussions forum and other places. While most of what they say about SA is objective and accurate, there are also certain "mitigating factors" unique to this forum that color their perceptions negatively.

You all have Rivercenter mall downtown but most of the action is down on the Riverwalk even though i've grown up in Austin I love SA considering I was born there and have relatives in SA

[tgannaway89]

Here is a flythrough of Village at The Rim for anyone interested:

http://www.reatarealestate.com/media/RimFlythrough.wmv

Don't you just love that 6 story Hotel Talavera!
It is pointless to build this "centerpiece" hotel/condos when the two Mariott's by the creek are going to be larger.