San Antonio Skyscrapers (merged threads) (Houston, Dallas: appointed, apartments, foreclosure)

[wCat]

Interesting post....OMShirt!

[infinity & beyond]

I agree with some of the thoughts expressed here. I think you're right - while building up certainly is not the best idea economically, it does have many intagible benefits, like being more respected.

San Antonio while the 7th largest city, is not a "known" city. A distinctive skyline, or simply more of an urban, upscale downtown could really change that. I can almost see a SA downtown that's like Dallas' uptown - hip and modern.

SA really needs to move the next level. It's been at the same place for years now and it's time for a change.

[adtobias]

I agree so what do we have to do make that happen

[asd]

yeah San Diego has alot of tall buildings but they all are shorter then 500ft. which is nothing compared to the 750ft. tower of Americas or the 565ft. Marriott hotel.

[oldmanshirt]

Originally Posted by asd

yeah San Diego has alot of tall buildings but they all are shorter then 500ft. which is nothing compared to the 750ft. tower of Americas or the 565ft. Marriott hotel.

True, SD has a 500 ft. height restriction. Washington D.C. I believe restricts it's buildings to the height of the Washinton memorial, giving it the nickname "city without a skyline".

What surprised me was San Jose', which is a city of almost a million. It's tallest (at 285 ft.) is actually it's city hall!

SD and SJ are similar in population to SA (all three are in the top 10 largest U.S. cities), so SA is by no means unique in being a large city with a low skyline. Maybe something about being named after a saint artificially stunts a city's height . Also, as I described in another thread, SA has many buildings that have a very large amount of square footage, but are built to be low in height (i.e., USAA's HQ and many buildings around the airport).

[adtobias]

but the architecture of tall buildings are much more to lookat then short buildings

[ryneone]

On the Emporis site there is a 20 story building in the medical center planned. Does anyone know if that is still planned?

[Yogi Barrister]

I live in SA and at lunch the other day I was told that Tesoro will be building a 20+ story building on Redland Road near the intersection of 281 and 1604.

I believe that part of the problem with SA's short building problem is that the city is so large in square mileage to begin with. Furthermore, the population center of the city is around Nacoma and 281, meaning that the best place to place a new office building is actually north of downtown.

And, let's admit it: it's a much better view looking out upon the Texas Hill Country than it is old neighborhoods on the flat side of town.

Let's just be grateful that we are getting another office building larger than 20 stories. (The last one built would have been Weston Centre circa 1988.)

[Yogi Barrister]

Originally Posted by wCat

I suppose I'm one of those who doesn't think this is important. Maybe it's partly because I grew up in Paris where there used to be a six story building limit to preserve the skyline. I know that since living there in ancient times, there have been exceptions to that, but still very few compared to other cities with large populations.

For those of you that think we NEED more skyscrapers, can you explain the "lure" of these buildings? I know the whole bit about upscale and sophistication....but does that fit this city? I think San Antonio has a casual elegance that is completely unique. That's what sets it apart from Houston, Austin and Dallas. Why do we have to compete? I'm all for progress, but for all intents and purposes, building UP is not cheap when you have room and the right price to grow OUT. As long as real estate remains affordable, and we're not land locked by mountains, sea or development....it isn't feasible to build in the air. Just the liability insurance alone on a skyscraper is many times more expensive than a lower rise building. Then you have more traffic down town, more congestion on city streets in a very tourist oriented town, and more parking problems where parking is already a huge problem.

So other than being "pretty" or competing with other "bigger" skylines, what is really practical about this idea?

I agree with you. Further, while SA may not have the "height" of the Dallas or Houston skylines, we enjoy a character that they cannot enjoy. We have preserved our historical buildings. Dallas and Houston really have not. It makes for such a great atmosphere around the River Walk.

In fact, I believe that one of the most beautiful skyscrapers in Texas is the 30 story Tower Building in SA. It's rich with artistic heritage: gargoyles, simple floor plans, lots of light, elegant commons areas, and a comfortable, warm feeling that I do not get when I visit the cold and careless skyscrapers of Dallas and Houston.

Let's not even talk about the Grand Hyatt. How long until they implode the thing? It is just too massive. It's very tacky and does not fit. It draws your attention with its gaudiness. I hate it so far. Maybe the finished product will change my mind, but so far, I hate what it has done to our skyline in SA.

[mrn970]

I dont care too much about the height of the buildings downtown, but please can we get some building with some color. I think what makes our downtown less appealing is the colors that are choosen for all the buildings. It seems that they want every building to have the same color as the Alamo! Forget the height can we gets some buildings with glass or at least some colors that make them look like they were made this century and not in the 1800's