HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2016, 7:51 AM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 1,812
SAN ANTONIO │ 226 NEWELL │ 4 FLOORS │ Proposed











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.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2016, 2:01 AM
Spoiler's Avatar
Spoiler Spoiler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 206
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2016, 3:09 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Er uh...
Posts: 6,189
The facade is nice, but NO RETAIL.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2016, 4:01 AM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 1,812
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...?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2016, 5:43 AM
WorldTexas WorldTexas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 225
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2016, 2:48 PM
Keep-SA-Lame's Avatar
Keep-SA-Lame Keep-SA-Lame is offline
COGSADCAJA- Publicist
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 629
Quote:
Originally Posted by WorldTexas View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2016, 5:31 PM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 1,812
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2016, 8:56 PM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 1,812
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2016, 2:24 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Er uh...
Posts: 6,189
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?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2016, 2:54 AM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 1,812
I don't know... and i hate to have this take what i can get mentality, but agh... i don't know ... :\
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2016, 10:43 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia
Posts: 3,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by WorldTexas View Post
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.
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2016, 5:31 PM
WorldTexas WorldTexas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown View Post
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?
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2016, 6:17 PM
WorldTexas WorldTexas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 225
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
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, … it isn't off the beaten path at all… even if the particular thing right across the street does itself not have retail.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
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.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
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…
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2016, 8:09 PM
NOLAmike's Avatar
NOLAmike NOLAmike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by WorldTexas View Post
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.
Wasn't Silver Ventures going to buy the Samuel's Glass building?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2016, 5:31 AM
Spoiler's Avatar
Spoiler Spoiler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 206
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2016, 11:48 PM
SAtown SAtown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by WorldTexas View Post
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.
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2017, 4:24 PM
WorldTexas WorldTexas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAtown View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2017, 6:40 AM
Boquillas's Avatar
Boquillas Boquillas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 80221
Posts: 1,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown View Post
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 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.
__________________
"Inspiration is for amateurs; the rest of us just show up and get to work." -Chuck Close

Flickr Blog Site
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2017, 5:40 PM
jaga185's Avatar
jaga185 jaga185 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 1,812
^^^ 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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2017, 1:26 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia
Posts: 3,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boquillas View Post
almost entirely residential all the way to the river, with no retail other than on the corners.
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
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 5:47 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.