Reply With Quote
Yep, pretty weird, esp since the mission's very own "hallowed""church" is a tacky souvenir shop packed with crap and super crowded. To take advantage of the traffic in there, they should install a bar and feature hallowed happy hours.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...er-4477583.php
i have two thoughts:
1) they speak of the integrity of alamo plaza as it has any left. is the river center mall and a ripley's wax museum consistent with the integrity of the area ?
2) what is with this ?:my understanding is the commission has some rule preventing shadows being cast on the alamo. it just seems to me the city is being held back by some unwritten mythology as opposed to a higher criteria.Betty Dabney, a retired environmental health professor, said she'll speak against the project at Wednesday's meeting, set for 3 p.m. at the Development and Business Services Center at 1901 S. Alamo St.
She said she's worried that the tower would cast winter shadows on hallowed ground.
“I plan to represent those who cannot speak for themselves: the fallen heroes of the Alamo,” she said.
Yep, pretty weird, esp since the mission's very own "hallowed"
If I remember aright, way back in the day it used to be a creepy mini-theatre with a filmstrip and bad art on the wall. this would have been about 1976.
Ripley's might be an improvement over what it was, and the touch of Hollywood is completely appropriate: the Alamo looms large on screen.
(I'm not gonna say anything about the location of River Center. Not sure what the problem is there, tbh . . .)
In!Yep, pretty weird, esp since the mission's very own "hallowed"
entrance too near the Alamo?
grieving the weight of "winter shadows": is there any possible downside to crushing rainbows to your bosom?
Don't forget all the street venders selling all kinds of out in front of the Alamo. Also, I cannot understand why the mayor and the rest of those elitist would not want a new multi-million dollar construction project that would add construction jobs and later hotel jobs, with increased property tax and sales tax revenue. Not to mention adding a new tall modern building to the downtown cityscape.
absolutely. the city needs to move ahead if it really intends to become more cosmopolitan. this commission is more concerned with the alleged architectural 'integrity' of the alamo than it is with moving forward. while austin continues to add to its skyline we have a retired hack fighting a personal war on behalf of bowie and crockett. this is the reason she gives for holding back progress ?
Austin is adding to the skyline, but there's still some goofy ordinances on the books about what you can build around the Capitol. I think that shadow requirement applies. Austin is just fortunate enough that the Capitol is up on a hill and that downtown stretches all the way down to the lake. Not as lucky in SA where the Alamo is right there in the middle of everything.
the Alamo, and all the missions, were located close to the river
Just build the damn hotel.
If winter shadows are cast on the Alamo, it will awaken the ghost of Santa Anna, and he will reconquer Texas.
This is important.
Certainly there's someone on the south side who can figure out how to put the Alamo on some hydraulics. Just jack up the Alamo as needed and build the hotel. It's win-win.
It was voted down by the HDRC yesterday. I love my city but it sure can be regressive. Thought the newer scheme was an improvement from the original "Lego" looking scheme which was fugly. I actually prefer that the design be a modern structure and contrast totally with the old Joske building. Kind of like the new Tobin center or McNay museum addition. But no. The winter shadow argument was used and the HDRC swallowed it. Ideally I would love to see more business and residential development downtown. But you can't turn down someone who wants to build something there. SA wants its cake and eat it to but we're not even getting anything to eat.
It's like people who say "I don't want the MLB, I'd rather wait for the NFL, thank you very much". Uh, the NFL ain't coming.
i was very dissapointed to see it voted down.
Look at that tree ting on the fallen heroes of the Alamo! Somebody stop it before it shades and cools us all!
someone needs to chop down that tree ! for the sake of davy crockett !!
Somebody needs to stop night time!
Ok, but only if the fallen heroes get discounted rates
Meanwhile, in Austin.......
Two Austin developers are proposing a $500 million mixed-use project downtown that — if it happens — would change the skyline with three new towers, including a high-rise with condominiums and hotel rooms that could become Austin’s tallest building.
In addition to residential, hotel and office uses, the developers envision shops and restaurants along Waller Creek like those lining San Antonio’s Riverwalk.
In addition to a condo/hotel tower that could be as tall as 65 stories — the Austonian residential tower at Congress Avenue and Second Streets is currently Austin’s tallest building at 56 stories —Sutton envisions an apartment tower of 35 to 45 stories and an office/retail tower of 17 to 20 stories. Pike said there are no height limitations on the tract, which is zoned for dense downtown development, and said it is not restricted by rules that protect Capitol views.
Yeah, Austin is insane with the downtown development, which is stupid considering I-35 hasn't been upgraded in like 35 years. Gonna take a Big Dig scale project to catch up.
true-austin ranked 5th for worst traffic in the US, ahead of even New York City. and i do not envision any relief anywhere in site. but their downtown is quickly leaving us behind. a major city has to have a viable downtown. but alas, we have to honor the spirit of the alamo !
SA is a lot poorer than Austin.
SA median per capita is about $20K, while Austin's is about $30K
http://www.city-data.com/income/inco...tin-Texas.html
http://www.city-data.com/income/inco...nio-Texas.html
It's very obvious looking at Austin vs SA urban center which is wealthier. Plus Austin has a lot of big tech companies vs SA's almost none, Austin has UT vs UTSA, Austin has all the state's lobbying assholes, professional associations' HQs, etc. A lot of wealth from being state capital.
i don't necessarily buy that argument. san antonio has several fortune 500 companies, tons of DOD contracts, the military and most importantly, a far more advanced medical/medical research sector than austin. also, san antonio has a healthy tourist industry and is becoming a haven for very wealthy mexican nationals (who are establising permanent residence here). while UT trumps UTSA, the private schools here are already reputable (trinity) or becoming a big player on the scene (UIW). austin, also, has no guilt about gentrification.
SA has 3 main industries that contribute in the $25B range: medical, (light) manufacturing, military. disease and "socialistic" taxpayer $Bs keep SA in good shape. USAA is of course a derivative of SA's long mlitary history.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
