SAN ANTONIO │ 226 Newell │ 4 FLOORS │ U/C
 

https://68.media.tumblr.com/b585cc96...yhko4_1280.jpg

https://68.media.tumblr.com/89ee033d...yhko1_1280.png

https://68.media.tumblr.com/2b7fc5b0...yhko2_1280.png

https://68.media.tumblr.com/62adac38...yhko6_1280.png

https://68.media.tumblr.com/50ee4578...yhko3_1280.png

Looks like we have a new addition to the southern side of the Pearl. Finally getting rid of that industrial park and filling in where the Fox Motel was. The applicant was Silver Ventures and Sarah Weston, and the owner being Brewery South LLC.

Link to the HDRC artice.

:cheers:

This development doesn't include the Fox Motel site. It's kinda an ugly monolithic block with no retail, but at least it hides the interstate and I'm loving the underground parking.

The facade is nice, but NO RETAIL.

I think it doesn't include retail because of its proximity to the Pearl. It could use it, but maybe they want people to go to the retail there...?

It's a little too far off the beaten path to have viable retail right now. That's a long walk down Avenue A or Karnes with no street activity to pull you down to Newell. Converting the Samuels Glass building would be a better play.

Agreed.

Yes! I feel like Samuel Glass, if redeveloped, would be prime for a corner store of some sorts.

I'm excited for this project. With the office 200ft office tower going up as well, the Pearl just keeps getting better and better.

The project has historical approval! They just have to go up to the HDRC one more time for details. Seems to be the norm happening.

EVERY foot of every ground floor in any urban residential neighborhood is a prime candidate for retail. Walk just about anywhere in New York City and you'll see every retail space filled with a store, a diner, a restaurant, a doctor's office... you name it. Not including ground level retail is a wasted opportunity. If I lived in that building I'd love to have a diner I could visit for breakfast or a midnight dinner. Retail makes the neighborhood. When will they learn?

I don't know... and i hate to have this take what i can get mentality, but agh... i don't know ... :\

You've got the be kidding, right? It's located at the end of the N/S street that cuts through the heart of the Pearl, Karnes, with significant residential density already immediately adjacent (not to speak of the additional this would bring). Retail here would instantly be simply a footprint expansion of existing retail capacity because it isn't off the beaten path at all. It's right there. Like literally. Literally across the street from the Pearl, even if the particular thing right across the street does itself not have retail.

Not only that, but it is adjacent to a river north access point with its foot traffic (as is, of course, the Glass building). The fact that they don't have a patio restaurant at the top of the ascent from the river, let alone a whole battery of retail spots fronting Newell is simply criminal. They wouldn't even need to offer public parking. The pearl's parking is a block away, and the population density and foot traffic of the area would be enough to carry the entire thing given the increases that would come with the ground level retail.

And even more: its on the main frontage of I-35 which is among the most visible locations in the entire city. The daily car traffic alone is enough to generate tremendous visibility for any business that occupies those locations which would guarantee their success.

Again, to reiterate: not off the beaten path at all. Not in the slightest and this should have retail. Period. That it doesn't is criminal.

And if you think the Samuels Glass Co. building would be a good spot for commercial space (which I agree -- it screams for a restaurant or event flexspace in an adaptive reuse), then why not pair that with retail across the street so that they can play off of each other and help each other build foot traffic on this end of the Pearl. And shouldn't we want the Pearl to better connect with downtown? Building foot traffic through here is the way to do that. And guess what? This little spot around the corner of Camden and Newell is a critical place in which to accomplish that goal. After all, right across the highway are another good bunch of residential developments, as well as SAMA.

In fact, I'd wager that a street interactive reuse of the Glass building that focused against Newell wouldn't do as well if there weren't also commercial activity here.

They already know that retail makes the neighborhood. Silver Ventures knows that better than any developer in San Antonio.

Unfortunately, every square foot of ground level space is not a prime candidate. As great as Pearl is and as dense as it's future could be, the density right now is nowhere near NY, Boston, or any major European city. Those are bad comparisons. There are tons of variables including transit connectivity, pedestrian counts, age of the structures, disposable income, etc. that influence when and what kind of retail makes sense.

Silver Ventures has been the most aggressive developer of urban retail in the city. If they chose not to do it, there's a good market-based reason.

I respectfully disagree. Don’t get me wrong, I want to see more urban retail back home, but I’m looking at this from a market perspective.
That is a long walk. To keep pedestrians moving – and get them to come back – they need to pass something new about every 5 seconds. Ten is a stretch. I’ve walked that block a few times and I have no desire to do it again. They could convert the ground level apartments to retail and fix that. It would be pricey.

There’s a difference between visibility and customers. Car traffic count is a great measure for suburban retail, not for the pedestrian-focused retail you’re advocating here. Urban retail depends on pedestrian counts.

If Silver Ventures owned both, I’d agree 100%. That they don’t own the building means that Samuel’s probably wants an exorbitant amount of money. Silver Ventures has bought up as much of the surrounding land as they could so they could stitch it all together. My guess is they couldn’t reach an agreement so they’re planning for this building to be on its own for a bit.

The new office building will be another great shot in the arm to help make more retail make sense. I’m very excited for that development! For those who really want to see more ground level retail space right now – talk with your neighborhood associations and City Councilmembers. The City Council could easily pass an ordinance requiring all new center city developments to incorporate retail frontage on the ground level.

Wasn't Silver Ventures going to buy the Samuel's Glass building?

I'm pretty confident that I read somewhere that the glass building was gonna be redeveloped by the pearl people, like it's a done deal and they're just waiting for the glass people to relocate.

Silver Ventures owns the Samuels Glass properties, and Samuels Glass has relocated (or is in the process of relocating) to a new building they purchased on IH-35.

I had no idea! So I was wrong and knowing this, I agree that it's insane there will be no retail on this new apartment building.

I know I'm a bit late to the conversation, but that's not really true, even in New York. My wife lived in a ground floor Astoria apartment a block from the subway and there was no retail in her building or the adjacent buildings. Most of Manhattan other than midtown and downtown follows the traditional big city residential street/high street pattern. My brother in law lives on the Upper West Side 2 blocks west of the Natural History Museum on a street that's almost entirely residential all the way to the river, with no retail other than on the corners. My wife's best friend lives in a big residential apartment building in Clinton Hill that is also in a retail-free zone and only a few blocks from the Barclay's Center. It doesn't mean those neighborhoods aren't vibrant walkable urban areas.

This urban residential renaissance is great for SA as it's creating incentives for retail development down there, and there's no shortage of places for it to be when it ultimately comes. But right now these little steps are fine.

^^^ I think that's the best description of whats going on here. But we do need pockets of retail in these places. I hope the samuel glass building will be retail of sorts. In the meantime, i'm so ready for this project.

That's all I / we're complaining about, is the lack of ground level retail on a major street on a direct river access corner.

This photo was taken on 10/30/17. You can see here that they demolished those random buildings that was next to the old motel. Get ready to see some progress at this site in the near future.

https://s26.postimg.org/gavwlagk9/20171030_144731.jpg

That building across the street has no ground level retail. Combine the residents of that building and this one and you have hundreds of potential customers for any business that would go into ground level retail of this building. Diners, dry cleaners, corner stores, and all the other non-high-end things that couldn't pay the rent at Pearl.

Please don't say you can't compare this area to New York or Boston. You absolutely can. It's urban residential. And it isn't even built up yet. Now is the perfect time to add the ground level retail necessary to make the neighborhood walkable and livable. Once you build something without it, you can't go back and add it retroactively. Not to sound preachy, but this is a good lesson for anyone on this forum who is a student of architecture or urban planning. Take it from someone who lived in New York City for 18 years... you need ground level retail!

I completely agree. I am an urban planning student who lives in NYC. I live in Brooklyn, specifically in Bushwick, a neighborhood that yes, overall has more density, but this specific area has the necessary density to start watching ground level retail thrive. This is never going to be a "24-hour neighborhood" if people are just going into these developments to sleep and go elsewhere to satisfy their needs. But ay, development is better than nothing, right? (Kinda tired of having to finish a post with that)

I'm gonna say no. Smart development is better than no development. Unintelligent development is worse.

The center of Pearl is literally a stones throw away. Why would Silver Ventures want to suck away from the center of the Pearl with ground level retail at these apartments? Silver Ventures is not dumb, they know what they’re doing.

I agree. Broadway is a block away and that major corridor is where ground level retail is important. Not a largely single family housing side street.

That building across the street has no ground level retail. Combine the residents of that building and this one and you have hundreds of potential customers for any business that would go into ground level retail of this building. Diners, dry cleaners, corner stores, and all the other non-high-end things that couldn't pay the rent at Pearl.

And again, why would Silver Ventures want to pull away from the center of the Pearl? All that you’re asking for can go on Broadway St. which is a block away.

I believe Jack was trying to draw your attention to the part where he says things not at the Pearl. As good as the Pearl is, it doesn't have everything.

IOW, some niche retail, or a beer box, something could be there.

I doubt SV would want any of those things at their development. They are developing that area with a very specific vision in mind. Those things/amenities Jack is talking about can and should go in at Broadway or other Tobin Hill developments not associated with SV/The Pearl.

Thank you.

Oy. SV can choose to whom they want to lease their retail spaces. But if they don't have any at all in these buildings (which are not in the Pearl), the people living in those buildings will have to walk several blocks to access what is at the Pearl. That will surely result in a higher percentage of them saying, "F--- it" and hopping in their car to go do their non-luxury retails thingies somewhere else. Picking up a gallon of milk or eating a 2-star every day dinner for example. People with a lot of money don't spend it all the time. That's one of the reasons they have a lot of money. Visit New York sometime and walk around. You'll see what I mean about all the things I'm saying. If you've been there already, then you already know what I mean.

Your whole comment is ridiculous. Broadway is a long corridor, and to assume that there is no room for discount, laundry, or just a quick in and out for beer, milk, or a hot dog is just stupid.

You can let the high end reside in Pearl, and still accommodate the common man.

To that end, since both are owned by SV, they are not robbing customers from themselves.

ETA: Who are you to decide where things should go, or what SV should be associated with?

And since I'm sure you will way this is off topic, I have moved the conversation here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...91#post7976591

Im not deciding where anything goes. All I did was suggest where it could go.

Aside from that, again, SV is not dumb and know what they’re doing. They don’t want to suck away from the central core of the Pearl. That’s what I’m saying. Not that they don’t want to steal away from the core.

SV know what they’re doing by not providing street retail.

And all I'm saying is perhaps you give them too much credit.

Not to mention, the lack of retail robs job creation, a community feel, and only seems welcome to the wealthy.

The "wrong side of the river" comes to mind. Surely SV is smart enough to not foment that thought.

But all of this is beside the point. A community is more than just fancy restaurants, and high end, (and overpriced), retail.

So, what exactly do you think SV goal is?

"They don’t want to suck away from the central core of the Pearl. That’s what I’m saying. Not that they don’t want to steal away from the core. "

Again, they wouldn't be doing either. They would be adding, not robbing, stealing, or sucking away from anything.

And again, Broadway is a long corridor. Getting to Broadway from the Pearl ain't exactly a walk in the park.

And yes, a rail line would be nice, as well a a truly effective river taxi.

I lived in New York City for nearly 18 years, from February 1994 through October 31, 2011. For the whole time I was there of course, there was ground level retail in most buildings, and certainly nearly 100% on major avenues. (There's not a lot on many residential side streets... maybe 20%, but most of those buildings only take up single lots about 25-40 feet street-facing and are over 100 years old.)

While I was there NYC got much more expensive and priced many of the tried and true retail businesses out. Big Nicks Burger and Pizza Joint was at Broadway & 77th for nearly 50 years, and the same story with many diners and small grocery stores, even CBGB's! What replaced them was high-end fashion stores and other crap like that. It took away much of the character of the neighborhoods and the city as a whole. Now it's largely a playground for the rich. But it still has street level retail all over the place.

If you haven't lived in a city that has such rampant ground-level retail, you have no idea how important it is for a thriving community, even if that community only spans a few blocks within the greater metropolis. If you have lived in a city that has it, then you know. But there's pretty much no in between, so it's fairly easy to spot the opinions of people who haven't experienced it and don't know its importance. That's not a slam, just a statement of fact because it's an important thing to know if you want to be a good urban planner/developer.

My point? An urban area needs ground level retail in as many places as it can have it. And yes, some of that ground level retail needs to be the everyday kind, such as dry cleaners, diners, corner stores, etc. Otherwise the neighborhood is either only for the rich or will cause its residents to get in their cars and go somewhere else to do their everyday shopping... or both.

To all aspiring urban planners: ground level retail is important!!!!!

.

I agree completely with Jackinbeantown. If SV were to add ground level retail, and they're as brilliant as we're saying they are, they would add to the pearl neighborhood as a whole. It wouldn't be sucking anything away. If the Pearl wants to be a great neighborhood, it won't have JUST a core. It will be a hub with streets around it that feed into the main entertainment area. I live in Brooklyn, in an area that is very up and coming, where there is one street that is the hub of the neighborhood. But there are still many other streets nearby that add more to the overall neighborhood and not just the one core area.

quoting for emphasis

Can we all just be happy that there's some development going on here on this small plot of land next to the pearl? I'm all up for some new scenery while driving down Newell st. and while walking down the riverwalk. I could care less if it has retail or not. Besides, they would just put some overpriced boutique store or an overpriced bar and grill at the ground level that an average Joe like me couldn't even afford or be interested in to begin with.

So all you really care about is looking at new scenery while driving your car down the same street, got it. Have you tried driving down a different street for a change? Problem solved!

Hey now, putting in a new residential building in place of what used to be some dumpy motel and some other random buildings is progress enough for that area

No. Don't settle for less just because what was there before was crap. It's irrelevant what was there, what matters is what's gonna be there for the next several decades.

I'd like to think that the heart and soul of the Pearl is hotel Emma, southerleigh, and the nice little courtyard in front of Southerleigh and the new cellars building. You then have all the other little restaurants, bakery, retail, office space, etc. that surrounds the main focal point of the Pearl. My point is this, the new residential building on Newell is off to the side of the Pearl, far far away from where all the attraction and foot traffic is at. No one would bother walking all the way down to Newell to check out a few stores there. That's my reason and thought as to why there's no ground retail being added to this new building.

Sounds more like reasons it should have retail.

No, no one wants to go to just one single residential building off to the side for just retail alone when they can just go to the main attraction (which is the Pearl) and shop, eat, relax, etc. People want to be where the action is.

The "action" can be anywhere. You said that Newell is "far, far away from where all the attraction and foot traffic is."

The point is, when 226 Newell and the construction across from it is built and filled, there would be plenty of traffic there, IF there were anywhere for them to go.

As it is, they will likely hop in a car, and go somewhere else.

Yeah, it's kind of like... great build a center attraction for people around the city to visit.

But don't forget to include retail amenities for the people that live there and won't actually leave when it's all said and done.

I routinely go to the GS1221 bar which is "one single residential building off to the side just for retail alone", because it's a relaxing neighborhood bar, usually not crowded, and is mostly locals and friends. Anecdotal evidence, but worth stating. Brown Coffee at 1800 Broadway is the same thing--it's in "one residential building off to the side for just retail alone", and it's always busy.

There's a benefit to having more options for retail and the opportunity to bar and restaurant hop--it's why people in Austin are willing to pay for an Uber ride to go Downtown, because if one place isn't a good scene, there are 40 others they can walk to instead. More options are a good thing, because it means people will have that much more to do when they go to the Pearl and it makes it worth their while.

I was very surprised that Silver Ventures did not include ground floor retail at these apartments--the city leaders should really start requiring ground floor retail if they're going to be giving out incentives (I'm just assuming they're going to ask for incentives at this one). Incentives have been wonderful for kickstarting development in the Pearl area, but it's 2017 and we should be asking for more if taxpayers are going to be shouldering the burden for luxury apartments with no benefit to the neighborhood other than bodies driving in and out of it to work. If we truly want a community in this Midtown area, we have to give people places to go and gather outside of the heart of the Pearl.

https://s26.postimg.org/mc1tnuj4p/20180207_131942.jpg

Taken on 2/7/18. Some progress from the last time I visited the site. They got the land all cleared and smoothed out, I'm assuming they're getting ready to lay out the rebar for the foundation?

As someone who knows next to nothing about construction, I’m wondering—how difficult is it to add in retail spaces to a development like this, after they’ve already done the designs? I mean, if the shell of the building isn’t going to change, it would mostly be an issue of adding in some walls and street facing windows, right?

It’s also not clear to me how it would be any less attractive financially; they’ll still be getting rent, it’ll just be from small business owners instead of residents.

I think it would be a huge missed opportunity if they didn’t have retail on this project. Especially considering that it faces north, in the heat of the summer it’ll be a nice respite to walk into a bar or restaurant or cafe or shop, and not have the sun pounding in through the windows.

It depends on the building, I'd imagine. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Cevallos Lofts building was originally not mixed use, but a couple of the ground floor units were converted to small retail shops soon after it was built. I might be dismembering that, though.