SAN ANTONIO │ River North │ Official Thread

[texboy]

Ah not so fast....Sculley (If memory serves me correct) was instrumental in getting rail in dt Phoenix and if anything, MORE density will come out of this bc the developers are complaining of NOT being zoned for taller structures with the current plan (that is if the plan is changed at all with this switch)

[alexjon]

I understand as much, but in a city that is bogged down by a density-hostile local government, I feel as though at some point the entire process will suddenly switch from "Grow" to "Stop", regardless of where Sculley cut her teeth.

Just playing devil's advocate, I suppose.

[SAguy]

I think the city manager taking over will be a good thing.

[jaga185]

Yeah, Sculley is one amazing person. I think she will fight for bigger and better things for River North.

[kornbread]

And that in a nutshell describes why San Antonio doesn't get downtown development like other cities. There are a lot of property owners who are wanna-be developers, but don't have the means to get anything done. And when they do try, you end up with an abandoned building on an abandoned street.

I'm leary of anything managed by the city in any way? They try to please everyone and do everything cheap. The city manager has her hands full just trying to bring the city into the 21st century.

Insider deals? Why do you think River North was presented in the first place? There's potential along the expanded river walk. Everyone has known about this. Certain people already had plans for the area, but wouldn't it be better with the tif? I can just see the insider-ness...

"Let's call it something snappy! Like... Uptown!"
"Not original..."
"SA Uptown? S'uptown?"
"Supper town!!"
"Dammit Big Lou, we'll eat after the meeting!"
"..NorthTown..."
"....<cricket sounds>...."
"Make the dam copies and get us coffee KW, no more ideas."
"What about Pearl Land?"
"Sit down Kit!"
"How about North River?"
"I thought you were supposed to be creative AA?"
"River North?"
"Good enough Yoda, let's go eat...Seriously Lou, you fat sweaty bastard, you're giving this city a bad name."

[sakyle04]

Originally Posted by alexjon

I understand as much, but in a city that is bogged down by a density-hostile local government, I feel as though at some point the entire process will suddenly switch from "Grow" to "Stop", regardless of where Sculley cut her teeth.

Just playing devil's advocate, I suppose.

remember that sculley is a downtown resident. she lives at la cascada, shops at hippos, and loves urbanity. we can trust her.

[sakyle04]

Originally Posted by kornbread

And that in a nutshell describes why San Antonio doesn't get downtown development like other cities. There are a lot of property owners who are wanna-be developers, but don't have the means to get anything done. And when they do try, you end up with an abandoned building on an abandoned street.

I'm leary of anything managed by the city in any way? They try to please everyone and do everything cheap. The city manager has her hands full just trying to bring the city into the 21st century.

Insider deals? Why do you think River North was presented in the first place? There's potential along the expanded river walk. Everyone has known about this. Certain people already had plans for the area, but wouldn't it be better with the tif? I can just see the insider-ness...

"Let's call it something snappy! Like... Uptown!"
"Not original..."
"SA Uptown? S'uptown?"
"Supper town!!"
"Dammit Big Lou, we'll eat after the meeting!"
"..NorthTown..."
"....<cricket sounds>...."
"Make the dam copies and get us coffee KW, no more ideas."
"What about Pearl Land?"
"Sit down Kit!"
"How about North River?"
"I thought you were supposed to be creative AA?"
"River North?"
"Good enough Yoda, let's go eat...Seriously Lou, you fat sweaty bastard, you're giving this city a bad name."

very funny. supper town?!?!

[alexjon]

Developers drive development. Look at the South Waterfront in Portland-- it only really exists since developers wanted some towers like Vancouver.

And Pearl District? Developers.

Seattle's Belltown developments? Developers.

The city is what stops things from happening when the market is alive. Of course, when the market dies, nobody can turn dirt anyway.

[chadpcarey]

Originally Posted by kornbread

And that in a nutshell describes why San Antonio doesn't get downtown development like other cities. There are a lot of property owners who are wanna-be developers, but don't have the means to get anything done. And when they do try, you end up with an abandoned building on an abandoned street.

I'm leary of anything managed by the city in any way? They try to please everyone and do everything cheap. The city manager has her hands full just trying to bring the city into the 21st century.

Insider deals? Why do you think River North was presented in the first place? There's potential along the expanded river walk. Everyone has known about this. Certain people already had plans for the area, but wouldn't it be better with the tif? I can just see the insider-ness...

"Let's call it something snappy! Like... Uptown!"
"Not original..."
"SA Uptown? S'uptown?"
"Supper town!!"
"Dammit Big Lou, we'll eat after the meeting!"
"..NorthTown..."
"....<cricket sounds>...."
"Make the dam copies and get us coffee KW, no more ideas."
"What about Pearl Land?"
"Sit down Kit!"
"How about North River?"
"I thought you were supposed to be creative AA?"
"River North?"
"Good enough Yoda, let's go eat...Seriously Lou, you fat sweaty bastard, you're giving this city a bad name."

I'll give you credit for the second part being funny. But the first part is factually incorrect.

The only thing Sculley will "manage" is the implementation of the master plan. Private owners/developers will still control individual sites/projects.

And we don't have "wanna-be" developers; we have cautious developers because the costs and complexity of building urban projects is staggering.

The Geiss project was a failure because Geiss stopped paying his contractor. And Cross & Co. are ready to re-start construction as soon as Geiss runs out of litigation options.

[kornbread]

Originally Posted by chadpcarey

I'll give you credit for the second part being funny. But the first part is factually incorrect.

The only thing Sculley will "manage" is the implementation of the master plan. Private owners/developers will still control individual sites/projects.

And we don't have "wanna-be" developers; we have cautious developers because the costs and complexity of building urban projects is staggering.

The Geiss project was a failure because Geiss stopped paying his contractor. And Cross & Co. are ready to re-start construction as soon as Geiss runs out of litigation options.

Thanks and you're right of course, this is definately an outsider's view. I did not take the time to look over that area's tax records.

Yes, manage was probably a poor choice of a word. I believe that the city's input is important. It's just that this city really hasn't had the best track record in regards to planning, so instead of taking a strong stand when they should I can see them easing up and letting dumb and ugly creep in.

I wasn't saying there were wanna-be developer's, it was property owners who have ambitions of or profiting from development and don't really understand the costs or complexity that go into these types of projects. Then when someone moves and starts to make things happen, like Cross, they become obstructionists and make claims of insider deals.

Maybe I'm being dense, but how exactly is this insider? When I think of insider deals, I think of land buying next to the Toyota site before it's announced. The big thing in this area is the riverwalk expansion. Everyone knows where the river runs. I think the Pearl development happened in the first place because they really believed the river expansion would happen. Will some other big thing happen in this area? Is at&t ready to make a major commitment to the city? (just threw that out there for fun)

[texboy]

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

I read last week in one of the presentation towards the bottom of this website that there are provisions being made for att expansion...just thought I would throw that out there

[kornbread]

It is kind of a long article, so here is the link:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/met...h.388b3d1.html

[jaga185]

I'm not sure exactly what they are complaing about to be honest. The fact that the neighborhood won't be designed by the neighborhood itself? But on the other hand, if Sculley is opposing it, then I'm not sure what to think. Again, I don't really understand what is going on here... so if someone wants to read this and explain this to me, that would be great.

[sirkingwilliam]

Originally Posted by jaga185

I'm not sure exactly what they are complaing about to be honest. The fact that the neighborhood won't be designed by the neighborhood itself? But on the other hand, if Sculley is opposing it, then I'm not sure what to think. Again, I don't really understand what is going on here... so if someone wants to read this and explain this to me, that would be great.

I don't think she's opposing the plan, I think she's just opposing the manner in which it came together that the property owners are complaining about. I also think she's opposing it in the media so early just to appease those property owners. Like she says, she doesn't know too much about it yet and wants to read everything and hear from everyone to get fully updated with everything so she can come to a better judgment.

I think when all is heard and revealed, the majority of the opposing property owners will be exposed as people just not wanting the plan to pass altogether for their own selfish reasons.

[chadpcarey]

kronbread:

You're more right than you know with regards to property owners. In SA, I've been very frustrated with the unrealistic expectations most property owners have. I get needled by many of my friends (good-natured.........I think.........) to "do something with all those crappy vacant lots/buildings down there".

Well, I can assure you that the owner of that "crappy vacant lot/building" thinks it's worth 3x it's actual value. And he/she is content to do nothing with it until he/she gets that price.

In the meantime, economic fundamentals for all deals are very, very skinny right now. Construction costs are still very high and volitile, capital is becoming much more expensive, and the lead-time for deals is too long.

Specific to the MP master plan, there are elements that I would probably not endorse, and I'm absolutely leery of giving COSA Development Services more regulatory authority, given the existing challenges of getting an urban building type approved (we're doing The Eighteen-Hundred, at Broadway & Grayson,and I have plenty of war stories).

That said, I'm encouraged that COSA (and Downtown Alliance, and Cross/Adelman/Lifshutz/etc.) are pushing for a grand vision. As you've pointed out, that's a big step forward for this city.

Chad.

[texboy]

http://www.sanantonioriver.org/museumreach.php

Wasn't sure if this had been posted yet....there is a webcam on the page where you can view several parts of the project all at once....its pretty cool!

[MABottz]

^^^Thanks for the link!

Does anybody know what is being done with the old Lone Star Brewery these days wrt to the River improvement project? I don't seem to see it factored in either the Eagleland or Museum Reach plans?? Also, any word on any development between Roosevelt Park and Conception?

If anybody knows of any other pending improvements/developments in that Eagleland area in general I'd really appreciate an update. My interest is strictly personal, (I grew up just down the street on Bank Street between Probandt and South Flores) and I gotta say I really can't believe someone is finally trying to spruce up my old barrio. This better work!

[alexjon]

Any news?

[KeepSanAntonioLame]

I saw the other day that they're tearing down a Cross & Co. owned building on the interstate side of Maverick Park.

[Schertz1]

This is the Cross development at Maverick Park, taken last weekend.