an advisory services panel report st.paulgateway district ... · st. paul gateway district san...

A N A D V I S O R Y S E R V I C E S P A N E L R E P O R T

St.Paul Gateway DistrictSan Antonio,Texas

Urban LandInstitute$

St. Paul Gateway DistrictSan Antonio, TexasA Redevelopment Plan

November 14–19, 2004An Advisory Services Panel Report

ULI–the Urban Land Institute1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.Suite 500 WestWashington, D.C. 20007-5201

An Advisory Services Panel Report2

ULI–the Urban Land Institute is a non-profit research and education organiza-tion that promotes responsible leadership in the use of land in order to enhance

the total environment.

The Institute maintains a membership represent-ing a broad spectrum of interests and sponsors awide variety of educational programs and forumsto encourage an open exchange of ideas and shar-ing of experience. ULI initiates research that an-ticipates emerging land use trends and issues andproposes creative solutions based on that research;provides advisory services; and publishes a widevariety of materials to disseminate information onland use and development.

Established in 1936, the Institute today has morethan 25,000 members and associates from 80 coun-tries, representing the entire spectrum of the landuse and development disciplines. Professionals rep-

resented include developers, builders, propertyowners, investors, architects, public officials,planners, real estate brokers, appraisers, attor-neys, engineers, financiers, academics, students,and librarians. ULI relies heavily on the expe-rience of its members. It is through member in-volvement and information resources that ULIhas been able to set standards of excellence in -development practice. The Institute has long beenrecognized as one of America’s most respectedand widely quoted sources of objective informa-tion on urban planning, growth, and development.

This Advisory Services panel report is intendedto further the objectives of the Institute and tomake authoritative information generally avail-able to those seeking knowledge in the field ofurban land use.

Richard M. RosanPresident

About ULI–the Urban Land Institute

©2005 by ULI–the Urban Land Institute1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W. Suite 500 WestWashington, D.C. 20007-5201

All rights reserved. Reproduction or use of the whole or anypart of the contents without written permission of the copy-right holder is prohibited.

ULI Catalog Number: ASS088

Cover photo ©Kemp Davis. Text photos by Woody Woodruff.

San Antonio, Texas, November 14–19, 2004 3

The goal of ULI’s Advisory Services Programis to bring the finest expertise in the realestate field to bear on complex land use plan-ning and development projects, programs,

and policies. Since 1947, this program has assem-bled well over 400 ULI-member teams to helpsponsors find creative, practical solutions forissues such as downtown redevelopment, landmanagement strategies, evaluation of develop-ment potential, growth management, communityrevitalization, brownfields redevelopment, militarybase reuse, provision of low-cost and affordablehousing, and asset management strategies, amongother matters. A wide variety of public, private,and nonprofit organizations have contracted forULI’s Advisory Services.

Each panel team is composed of highly qualifiedprofessionals who volunteer their time to ULI.They are chosen for their knowledge of the paneltopic and screened to ensure their objectivity.ULI panel teams are interdisciplinary and typi-cally include several developers, a landscapearchitect, a planner, a market analyst, a financeexpert, and others with the niche expertiseneeded to address a given project. ULI teamsprovide a holistic look at development problems.Each panel is chaired by a respected ULI mem-ber with previous panel experience.

The agenda for a five-day panel assignment is in-tensive. It includes an in-depth briefing day com-posed of a tour of the site and meetings with spon-sor representatives; a day of hour-long interviewsof typically 50 to 75 key community representa-tives; and two days of formulating recommenda-tions. Many long nights of discussion precede thepanel’s conclusions. On the final day on site, thepanel makes an oral presentation of its findingsand conclusions to the sponsor. A written reportis prepared and published.

Because the sponsoring entities are responsiblefor significant preparation before the panel’s visit,including sending extensive briefing materials toeach member and arranging for the panel to meetwith key local community members and stake-holders in the project under consideration, partic-

ipants in ULI’s five-day panel assignments areable to make accurate assessments of a sponsor’sissues and to provide recommendations in a com-pressed amount of time.

A major strength of the program is ULI’s uniqueability to draw on the knowledge and expertise ofits members, including land developers and own-ers, public officials, academicians, representativesof financial institutions, and others. In fulfillmentof the mission of the Urban Land Institute, thisAdvisory Services panel report is intended to pro-vide objective advice that will promote the re-sponsible use of land to enhance the environment.

ULI Program StaffRachelle L. LevittExecutive Vice President, Policy and Practice

Mary Beth CorriganVice President, Advisory Services and Policy Programs

Nancy Zivitz SussmanSenior Associate, Advisory Services

Nicholas GabelAssociate, Advisory Services

Jason BellPanel Coordinator, Advisory Services

Yvonne StantonAdministrative Assistant

Nancy H. StewartDirector, Book Program

Julie D. Stern/JDS CommunicationsManuscript Editor

Betsy VanBuskirkArt Director

Martha LoomisDesktop Publishing Specialist/Graphics

Kim RuschGraphics

Diann Stanley-AustinDirector, Publishing Operations

About ULI Advisory Services


The ULI panel would like to extend its spe-cial thanks to San Antonio Mayor EdwardD. Garza for supporting the proposal tobring a ULI Advisory Services panel to the

city of San Antonio to focus on the redevelopmentof the city’s near Eastside. The panel also recog-nizes Councilman Joel Williams, who spearheadedthis effort for his community and was particularlygenerous with his time, as was former MayorHenry Cisneros. Both Williams and Cisneros pro-vided valuable insight into the current atmos-phere for development. Jelynne LeBlanc Burley,assistant city manager, met with the panel andserved as a liaison between the planning depart-ment staff and the city council. ULI appreciatesthe city of San Antonio’s confidence in the Advi-sory Services Program, which has conducted sev-eral other panel studies for the city.

Emil R. Moncivais, director of planning for thecity of San Antonio, and Nina Nixon-Mendez,planning manager, provided useful consultation.ULI’s primary planning department contacts—Christine Vina, special projects coordinator, andAndrew Holubeck, planner II—were responsiblefor preparing the panel application and briefingmaterials, organizing the study area tour, andscheduling interviews with key stakeholders.These components of the process are designed toassist the panel in addressing the issues presentedby the sponsor. The panel gained significant in-

sights from the particularly thorough briefing ma-terials and the trolley and walking tour of theEast Commerce Street area and its surroundings.Special thanks go to the community stakeholderswho assisted in providing information on the tour,including the Eastown at Commerce Neighbor-hood Commercial Revitalization representatives,William (Bill) Lewis III of the Carver CommunityCultural Center, Friedrich Building developersJohn Miller and Eugene Simor, and FriedrichBuilding tenant Officesource, Ltd.

In addition, thanks go to the various city depart-ments that provided information prior to thepanel’s visit and to the San Antonio Convention & Visitors Bureau and REOC Partners, Ltd., forgenerously providing timely information duringthe week. The panel also had the opportunity tointerview more than 70 area stakeholders, all ofwhom provided useful information. These inter-viewees included consultants currently workingon redevelopment projects in the study area, nu-merous public officials, local business owners, rep-resentatives of various neighborhood groups, andneighborhood residents. Their individual perspec-tives were crucial to the panel process. Thesestakeholders serve as a major asset in advancingthe interests of this community.

Acknowledgments


ULI Panel and Project Staff 6

Foreword: The Panel’s Assignment 7

Summary of Findings and Recommendations 11

Market Potential 13

Urban Design and Planning 23

Development Strategies 32

Implementation 39

Conclusion 46

About the Panel 48

Contents


Panel ChairJ. Kevin LawlerManaging PartnerN-K Ventures LCWest Palm Beach, Florida

Panel MembersRobert H. Busler, Jr. PrincipalWDG Architecture, PLLCWashington, D.C.

David R. DeSimoneSenior Vice President of Operations/General Counsel

The Pittsburgh Cultural TrustPittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Lynn Everett-LeeLand Use and Transportation Program ManagerSouth Florida Regional Planning CouncilHollywood, Florida

Philip S. HartPresident/CEOHart Realty AdvisorsLos Angeles, California

W. Thomas LavashSenior AssociateEconomics Research AssociatesWashington, D.C.

David S. PlummerPresidentDavid Plummer & AssociatesCoral Gables, Florida

Harry G. Robinson IIIPrincipalTRG ConsultingWashington, D.C.

Mtamanika YoungbloodChair of the BoardHistoric District Development CorporationAtlanta, Georgia

ULI Project DirectorNancy Zivitz SussmanSenior Associate, Advisory Services

ULI On-Site CoordinatorsJason BellPanel Coordinator, Advisory Services

Kristen CochranCoordinator, Meetings and Events

ULI Panel and Project Staff


The city of San Antonio commissioned theUrban Land Institute (ULI) Advisory Ser-vices Program to organize a panel of expertsto address a series of specific planning and

development issues in an area on the city’s easternedge, adjacent to the downtown. During the pastseveral decades, the city has invested consider-able resources in the ongoing development of itsdowntown area to support and expand its strongvisitor industry, which is anchored by the historicSan Antonio Riverwalk. These investments in-clude the recently completed expansion of theHenry B. Gonzalez Convention Center, ongoingadditions and improvements to HemisFair Park,prior investments in the Rivercenter Mall, and thepending development of a new convention centerheadquarters hotel.

The study area experienced a renaissance with therevitalization of the historic Sunset Station and St.Paul Square area structures in the late 1970s andearly 1980s. In the early 1990s, the city decided toextend the geographic scope of its visitor facilitiesby locating the Alamodome on the eastern side ofInterstate Highway 37 (IH-37). The 1993 open-ing of the Alamodome, then home to the NationalBasketball Association (NBA) San Antonio Spurs,added immediate economic stimulus to the SunsetStation/St. Paul Square area and served as aninitial impetus for fledging redevelopment in thearea that is the focus of this report.

In 2003, the Spurs relocated to a new home, theSBC Center, located approximately three mileseast of the Alamodome. The relocation of theSpurs precipitated a steady decline in economicactivity in the Sunset Station/St. Paul Squarearea. At the same time, in conjunction with BexarCounty and the Spurs, the city initiated a planningand development analysis of an area encompass-ing approximately 14 square miles on the easternside of the downtown to set the stage for futuregrowth and redevelopment. This effort resulted

Foreword: The Panel’s Assignment

in the Arena District/Eastside Community Plan,completed in 2004.

The Study AreaThe area addressed in this report encompasses 227acres. Initially defined by the city as the East Com-mence Street corridor, the study area is boundedby IH-37 at its western edge, by Montana Street

Location map.

Regional map.

Austin

Corpus Christi

Dallas

El Paso

Fort Worth

HoustonSan Antonio

AR

KA

NS

AS

LOU

ISIA

NA

NEW MEXICO

OKLAHOMA

Missouri

TEXAS

MEXICO

177

1

183

1

270

271

277

2

62

6

69

6

69

70

7070

7

75

7

77

8

81

8

175

180180

180

181

183

183

183

183

183

190

1190

190

190

2

271

277

277

277

277

277

2

281

281

281

281

283

283

283

2

285

287

287

287

287

287

2

287

290

290

290

377

377

377

377

377

380380

380

385

385

385

3

57

59

5

59

59

5

59

6

62

62

6

62

62

67

67

67

69

69

69

6

70

77

77

77

77

77

77

79

7

79

79

8

80

81

81

81

8282

82

8

83

83

83

83

8

84

84

84

84

84

84

87

87

87

87

87

8

87

87

90

90

90

90

9

90A

9

35

3

44

4

10

1

20 20

20

27

30

35

35W

37

4

45

45

45

35

10

35

10

Austin

Corpus Christi

Dallas

E

Fort Worth

Houston

San Antonio

A

OKLAHOMA

M

TEXAS

M ICO


to the south, and by Monumental Street at itseastern edge. The area’s northern boundary zigsalong Nolan Street, Brown Alley, Dawson Alley,and Florence Street. The study area therefore ex-tends a considerable distance beyond the corridor.

The panel initially questioned the delineation ofthe study area’s boundaries because of the pres-ence of significant development patterns imme-diately outside and adjacent to it. However, thepanel has elected to maintain the study area’s ex-isting boundaries and to address important adja-cent development patterns as “edge conditions.”

Early in its investigation and analysis process, thepanel concluded that because of its developmentpatterns, geographic contours, and historic signif-icance, the study area required special attentionbeyond that envisioned by the city as a more de-tailed part of the Arena District/Eastside Commu-nity Plan. The far western section of the study areawas de facto annexed into the downtown with theopening of the Alamodome; land lying betweenIH-37 and the Union Pacific (UP) railroad trackspresently is zoned as category “D,” identical to allthe properties lying immediately west of IH-37 inthe traditional downtown area. (“D” zoning in thedowntown provides for concentrated retail, service,office, and mixed uses in the central business dis-trict.) Additionally, land situated two blocks eastof the UP tracks in the midsection of the study area

—while currently a mixture of transit surface lotsand quasi-industrial buildings—also is currentlyzoned “D.”

The remnants of a residential neighborhood thatwas the historic domicile and cultural center ofthe city’s African American community lie pri-marily to the north of the East Commerce Streetcorridor. The recently renovated Carver Commu-nity Cultural Center and the newly developed, pri-vately sponsored Carver Academy reflect the studyarea’s strong African American heritage. At thefar eastern edge of the study area are 31 historiccemeteries on 103 acres of land. Within the ceme-tery land, a Texas Historical Marker indicates thesite of La Garita, the eastern garrison of the Alamo,also known as Powderhouse Hill. Bisecting thelower third of the study area is East CommenceStreet, a main arterial leading to and from down-town San Antonio.

The panel elected to address the study area asboth an important physical and developmentalbridge between the city’s past and its future, andas the main gateway to and from downtown andthe eastern side of San Antonio. The panel be-lieves that the study area is a unique part of thecity with a special identity. It is important as morethan just a starting point for the larger ArenaDistrict/Eastside Community Plan and more thanjust an eastern appendage to downtown San Anto-

The Sunset Station depotbuilding just off EastCommerce Street islocated north of the Alam-odome, which can beseen in the distance.


nio. For the purpose of this report, therefore, thepanel suggests a new name for the study area thatreflects its historic and strategic significance: theSt. Paul Gateway District.

Study Area Development IssuesThe study area should soon begin to feel the bene-fits of downtown expansion spurred by the contin-uing growth of the overall San Antonio economy.While signs of recent private and public reinvest-ment clearly exist—most notably the recent con-struction of the Holiday Inn Express and reno-vation of the Best Western Sunset Suites hotelson East Commence Street, the renovation of theCarver Community Cultural Center, and the im-pressive campus of the Carver Academy—for themost part, the St. Paul Gateway District reflectsyears of disinvestment and neglect.

The panel identified the following as issues thatcurrently inhibit redevelopment of the study area:

• Dominating north/south transportation barri-ers, including IH-37 and the UP railroad tracks;

• Hostile physical conditions, including limitedroadway connections to the downtown, exten-sive physical deterioration of existing struc-tures, abandoned or shuttered buildings, andvacant property;

• A deteriorated housing stock;

• Inconsistent development patterns and incom-patible land uses;

• A low level of city services;

• A transitioning and transient population; and

• A diminished cultural memory.

The panel addressed these development chal-lenges in an overall framework of findings andrecommendations.

The Panel’s FrameworkCity staff posed some 30 questions for the panel toaddress within a functional framework consistingof four categories: market potential, planning andurban design, development strategies, and imple-mentation. The panel has maintained these func-tional categories in the organization of this report,which addresses the questions posed by the spon-sor. After considerable deliberation, however, thepanel elected to organize its substantive responsesto the city’s questions in terms of four “framingstatements.” The panel views these framing state-ments as most indicative of the short-, intermedi-ate-, and long-term policies needed to guide andsupport reinvestment in and revitalization of theSt. Paul Gateway District.

The Alamodome, com-pleted in 1993, was theprevious home of theNBA’s San Antonio Spursand still serves as a majorevent venue. The area toits south offers a potentialdevelopment opportunity.


tions are directed to the near and intermediateterm. Although the panel strongly believes that anumber of long-term planning and developmentissues need to be addressed, all of these issues in-volve a long-term plan for the entire area east ofthe downtown, a geographic area much larger inscope than the St. Paul Gateway District. In fram-ing its findings and recommendations in this re-port, the panel has been attentive to how, overtime, its more immediate recommendations will fitinto and support a long-range plan for the entireeastern edge of downtown San Antonio.

The four framing statements advanced and in-corporated throughout each section of the reportare as follows:

• Reconnecting with the city;

• Humanizing the corridor;

• Investing in the district; and

• Establishing a new focus and a new identity.

These four framing statements convey the essen-tial elements of a successful program for the revi-talization of the St. Paul Gateway District. For themost part, the panel’s findings and recommenda-


The panel is keenly cognizant that the city ofSan Antonio has multiple development andinvestment activities underway in responseto an expanding and ever transforming met-

ropolitan economy. The panel is equally aware thatthe city has ever escalating demands on its finiteresources. The panel also acknowledges that termlimits on elected leaders result in regular shiftsor redirection of resources in the city’s public pol-icy emphasis.

In considering various approaches associated withdevelopment strategies and a workable implemen-tation plan, the panel consciously rerouted its rec-ommendations away from traditional redevelop-ment models. While this report clearly containselements of classic redevelopment approaches, thepanel has recommended a series of different ap-proaches for the St. Paul Gateway District, whichit believes, over time, likely will give rise to alower level of direct, long-term public investmentby the city and provide a platform for ongoing pri-vate redevelopment and revitalization. The panel’sprimary recommendations are summarized below.

Market Potential The visitor industry and associated hotel develop-ment, together with new residential development,offer the primary source of development demandopportunity. However, capturing market demandin this area is not automatic or assured, given achanging competitive position. To realize the area’smarket potential, the city will need to take a num-ber of directed and dedicated actions. Public sup-port for the proposed convention center hotel, tobe located immediately north of the Alamodome,and the first-phase, mixed-use development of theFriedrich Building are immediate opportunitiesthat will establish a market presence and momen-tum in the study area. The success of these twoprojects could set the stage for additional devel-opment opportunities.

Planning and Urban DesignThe appropriate and enduring guidelines for thestudy area’s planning and urban design are con-tained within the four framing statements. Eachof these statements sets forth a proscriptive set ofpolicies and actions to guide and enhance the char-acter of further development in the area. Embed-ded within these framing principles is the need foran early and complete rezoning of the study areain a manner consistent with its important positionin the overall buildout and revitalization of the city’seastern edge. This includes the introduction of twotypes of new mixed-use incentive zoning categoriesthat can serve as a model for other parts of thecity. Similarly, the drafting and adoption of strongdesign guidelines will raise the overall quality ofnewly built or renovated development to reinforceselected public investment. In the longer term,there is a clear need for a plan that will addressthe entire eastern edge of the downtown.

Development StrategiesIt is unrealistic to expect that any meaningfulredirection of areawide revitalization will occurwithout the hands-on support of the city at theoutset. Accordingly, initial development strategieswill be dependent on the city’s leadership. Thesestrategies should include a complete rezoning ofthe study area; stepped up code enforcement andneighborhood security, plus targeted investmentin new infrastructure; and collateral public sup-port of the two pending development proposals,the new hotel immediately north of the Alamod-ome and the first phase of the Friedrich Building.The city’s investments can be leveraged throughongoing private investment, particularly if cou-pled with a new mixed-use zoning incentive pro-gram. The panel strongly urges the city to aban-don the current tax increment financing (TIF)district covering the study area or, at a minimum,

Summary of Findings andRecommendations


remove the study area from this and any futureTIF district.

ImplementationThe panel recommends a new organizational struc-ture to implement the development program andstrategies for the study area. Specifically, thepanel recommends a community action committee(CAC) authorized by an ordinance of the city coun-cil and reporting directly to the council. The CACwould be composed of representatives from exist-ing neighborhood-based organizations. It would actas the champion for guiding the initial stage—thefirst five years—of the effort, creating the busi-ness plan for reinvestment, bridging the ongoingand future plans of the study area’s nonprofit

stakeholders, and providing leadership on the de-ployment and application of specific implementa-tion tools recommended by the panel.

The balance of this report presents the panel’scomplete findings and recommendations. Thepanel strongly believes that the St. Paul GatewayDistrict deserves special attention by the city andthat it can serve as the pacesetter for other rede-velopment efforts that the city may wish to pur-sue in the future. The panel emphasizes the needfor heightened attention to this area as a signifi-cant part of the city’s public investment programthat includes the downtown and the Arena Dis-trict/Eastside community.


This section examines potential market sup-ports for a range of land uses as a means ofidentifying realizable revitalization strate-gies for the St. Paul Gateway District. In

order to accurately measure the depth of these op-portunities—as well as identify appropriate devel-opment and implementation strategies—the panelframes the market potential analysis by address-ing the city’s main concerns.

The market analysis is designed to evaluate mar-ket forces affecting the competitive position of theSt. Paul Gateway District and to determine howthese advantages and disadvantages may driverevitalization strategies. In addition, the marketanalysis tests the economic potential of and mar-ket support for the uses identified to provide a“road map” that will help guide future investmentand redevelopment efforts in the district by boththe public and private sectors. It also identifiesthe depth of market support for specific near-termopportunities that will build momentum for subse-quent revitalization efforts.

As the basis for its analysis and recommendations,the panel profiled demographic and economic char-acteristics to identify fundamental drivers of de-mand for various land uses. The panel examinedregional demographic and economic trends in SanAntonio, focusing on the greater downtown areaand the Eastside, and reviewed growth trendsand forecasts for specific factors such as popula-tion, number of households, age composition, em-ployment, household incomes, consumer spendingpatterns for a range of retail categories, visitor/tourism trends and spending patterns, and otherappropriate economic indices.

The second element of the market analysis exam-ined real estate market conditions for a range ofuses, focusing on downtown San Antonio becauseof its critical role as an existing—or potential—economic engine for adjacent and nearby neigh-borhoods. This included supply-side characteris-

tics such as commercial office and retail inventory,net absorption/leasing activity, rental rates, andother characteristics that illustrate the overallhealth of the downtown office and retail markets.To evaluate lodging uses, the panel examinedtrends in annual occupancy, room rates, andchanges in the city’s convention and visitor mar-kets. For residential uses, it reviewed availableinformation on existing and proposed downtownhousing projects, building permit trends, and othermarket characteristics such as for-sale pricing andrental rates, occupancy patterns, and the like.

The Drivers of Demand: DemographicCharacteristicsAs a whole, the San Antonio metropolitan areahas experienced strong growth in population,households, and employment since 1990. The re-gion’s economy is diverse; key sectors include bio-medical/health care, information technology andsecurity, hospitality, and the military, which en-sures a cushion during periodic dips in the na-tional and regional economies. Notable demo-graphic characteristics are highlighted below.

The San Antonio metropolitan statistical area(MSA) is comprised of eight counties: Bexar, Comal,Guadalupe, Wilson, Atascosa, Medina, Bandera,and Kendall. Bexar County is the region’s larg-est, comprising roughly 81 percent of the metro-politan area’s 2003 population of 1,813,445. Thecounty’s population has increased by more than286,000 residents since 1990. In July 2003, basedon census estimates, the city of San Antonio, with1,471,644 residents, surpassed the city of Dallas intotal population.

Conversely, the study area has lost populationsince 1990. According to information provided bythe city, the population residing within a one-mileradius of Sunset Station declined by more than2,200 persons between 1990 and 2000—a drop of

Market Potential


13 percent—to roughly 15,200 residents. Popula-tion declined in all age groups except those from45 to 64 years old. Thus, the study area constitutesonly 1 percent of the county’s total population. Thisis known as its competitive share. Notably, thisloss translated into a decrease of more than 500households, mainly from renter-occupied units.

Retail potential typically is measured by changesin household incomes and consumer spending pat-terns. Household incomes in the study area exhib-ited compound annual (that is, real) growth duringthe 1990s, increasing about 7 percent, to $21,740.By comparison, while the median household in-come across the city was $36,200, significantlyhigher than in the Eastside, the rate of real growththere, 4 percent per year, was lower.

Another critical barometer of demand for real es-tate—particularly workforce-related uses such asoffice, flex-tech, retail, and the like—is measuredby growth in employment. The region’s largest em-ployers include the military (Fort Sam Houston,Lackland Air Force Base), insurance (USAA), tele-communications (SBC Communications), healthcare (Methodist Healthcare, Baptist Health Sys-tem), and the government.

San Antonio added more than 111,000 new jobsbetween 1995 and 2004. Illustrative of the region’sdiversified economy, job growth occurred in everysector except manufacturing. This includes infor-mation and telecommunications, with 7,000 newjobs, finance/insurance/real estate (15,000), profes-sional/business services (24,000), and leisure/hos-pitality (15,000).

The panel notes that biomedical technology ac-counts for a sizable portion of the metropolitanarea’s economy. The majority of economic genera-tors in this sector—such as hospitals—are locatedon the northwest side of the city as well as at FortSam Houston. Several medical professionals serv-ing nearby households represent the medical sec-tor in the study area. In addition, a large dialysisclinic in the study area serves clients from beyondthe immediate neighborhood.

Woods & Poole, Inc., a national demographic fore-casting service, has prepared employment fore-casts for Bexar County that suggest continued

strong employment growth over the next ten years.Applying the Woods & Poole growth rates, bysector, to the 2004 base year employment statis-tics published by the Texas Workforce Commis-sion suggests that an additional 136,000 new jobscould be created in San Antonio between 2005 and2015. The strongest sectors are expected to befinance/insurance/real estate and services. Thisgrowth is expected to translate into significantdemand for commercial real estate. The challenge,of course, is to identify a realistic capture rate ofthis potential new growth for the St. Paul Gate-way District.

Household consumer spending patterns are an-other indicator of a community’s overall economichealth. In Bexar County, the average householdspends approximately 39 percent of it annual me-dian income, or $16,700 per year, across a rangeof retail categories, including groceries, clothing,furniture, restaurants, and general merchandise.This is significantly below the national averageof $24,200 per household.

Retail spending patterns of Eastside area house-holds were not available for this report. If one as-sumes that the proportion of spending, as a per-centage of household income, is similar to that ofBexar County as a whole, however, this suggeststhat households on the Eastside spend approxi-mately $8,500 per year on goods and services. In-creasingly, many national retailers are respondingto this untapped buying power by locating storesin inner-city areas, such as the Walgreens phar-macy on the Eastside.

One of the largest segments of the region’s econ-omy is the hospitality industry. According to astudy prepared for the Greater San AntonioChamber of Commerce, the economic impact ofhospitality on San Antonio’s economy was nearly$7.2 billion in 2002. The industry reportedly con-tributes nearly $100 million in taxes and fees tothe city—roughly 16 percent of its annual revenue—and employs more than 86,000 people.

Hospitality-related employment has grown bymore than 30 percent since 1992. Moreover, theGreater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce esti-mates that the city hosts 20 million visitors everyyear. This includes about 15.6 million leisure trav-


elers as well as 4.3 million business visitors whotravel to San Antonio for conventions and otherpurposes.

Real Estate: The Other Side of theMarket EquationThe panel examined market conditions across arange of uses, including commercial office and re-tail, hotel/lodging, housing, and flex/industrial, inorder to understand regional influences on the St.Paul Gateway District, test market potentials, andidentify positioning strategies for revitalization.These findings are highlighted below.

Office The San Antonio office market is comprised ofroughly 22.7 million square feet of multitenantspace spread across the metropolitan area. Since2000, the total inventory has expanded by morethan 1 million square feet. Notably, the amount ofvacant office space across the metropolitan areaalso has jumped, from 2.6 million square feet in2000 (12 percent vacancy) to almost 4.3 millionsquare feet today, reflecting a current office va-cancy rate of 19 percent.

Weakened market conditions also are apparent inflat rents and negative absorption. Despite netgains in the area’s labor market, much of this jobgrowth has not translated into demand for netnew office space. For example, despite positiveabsorption (that is, net leasing) in 2000 and againin 2004, average annual absorption across the re-gion remained flat between 2000 and 2004 becauseof negative absorption in the intervening years.Moreover, rental rates have remained flat acrossall classes of office buildings, staying around $17to $18 per square foot during this period.

Office market conditions are equally flat in thecentral business district (CBD). Today, the CBDcontains about 5.1 million square feet of multi-tenant space, excluding headquarters propertiesfor SBC Communications and USAA. Inventoryhas remained static since 2000. Notably, the amountof vacant space has increased, in part because ofthe migration of office tenants to outlying subur-ban submarkets. In fact, the amount of vacant of-fice space in downtown San Antonio climbed from680,000 square feet in 2000 to almost 1.2 million

square feet in 2004. Vacancy rates range from 17percent in the premier, Class A stock to more than40 percent in the CBD’s Class C inventory.

Similar to citywide trends, downtown office rentalrates have remained flat since 2000, in the range of$17 to $18 per square foot on a full-service basis.Weakened market conditions in the CBD also areevident in absorption trends. Since 2000, the CBDhas experienced negative absorption averagingmore than 100,000 square feet per year.

The panel notes the apparent disconnect betweenthese negative market characteristics in San An-tonio’s office market and job growth figures overthe past five years, as overall job growth between1995 and 2004—111,000 net new jobs—should haveresulted in significant demand for office space. Thissuggests that employment growth was accommo-dated within existing leased premises, was con-centrated in owner-occupied properties that typi-cally are not tracked in office market surveys,and/or largely generated overall net positive ab-sorption between 1995 and 2000.

Hotel/LodgingThe downtown lodging market benefits substan-tially from one of San Antonio’s core industries,the hospitality industry. As noted above, theGreater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce esti-mates that the city hosts 20 million visitors everyyear, including about 15.6 million leisure travelersas well as 4.3 million business visitors, generating$7.2 billion in economic impact.

The region’s hospitality industry generates sig-nificant demand for hotel properties. DowntownSan Antonio contains more than 10,700 rooms in63 properties, accounting for fully one-third of theregion’s 32,000 rooms. According to Smith TravelResearch, which tracks hotel markets nationwide,the current annual downtown hotel occupancy rateis 70.2 percent, a slight decline from the 2003 levelof 71.1 percent. Occupancy levels in the downtownhotel inventory have varied between 66 and 74percent since 1994. As a rule, the capital marketswould look favorably upon these rates, as financialfeasibility measures for new hotel developmenttypically require minimum annual occupancies of70 percent.


While occupancies have fluctuated, room supply hasincreased, from 7,300 rooms in the downtown mar-ketplace in 1994 to more than 10,700 today—a 46percent jump—with the addition of more than3,000 new rooms to the downtown lodging inven-tory over this period. Average daily rates increasedfrom $97 in 1994 to roughly $112 per room per nightin 2004. Revenue per available room has remainedflat, around $71 per room per night between 1994and 2004.

Supporting and Destination RetailRetail and entertainment uses require a concen-tration of disposable income— from nearby resi-dents, employees, and/or visitors—strong visibil-ity and extensive frontage, adequate parking, anda clear competitive role and market identity. More-over, supporting tenants often require an anchortenant to generate traffic. The panel examined—on a preliminary basis—market characteristics inthe downtown retail market.

As of 2004, the CBD retail market comprises 1.3million square feet of gross leasable area. Thisaccounts for less than 4 percent of the region’stotal retail inventory of 34.1 million square feet.Reflecting significant population growth and thesizable disposable income of households residingin the north and west flanks of San Antonio, thevast majority of the region’s retail inventory (29.6million square feet) is located in those areas. Bycomparison, the 1.3 million square feet compris-ing the downtown retail market is located prin-cipally in the Rivercenter Mall, a 1.2 million-square-foot super regional, enclosed mall thatwas financed, in part, with federal urban develop-ment action grants and anchors one end of the SanAntonio Riverwalk.

Retail occupancies in downtown San Antonio arereportedly quite strong, with current vacanciesof only 3.6 percent (38,610 square feet), accordingto REOC Partners, Ltd. This reflects strong con-sumer spending patterns from visitors and, to alesser extent, downtown employees. Accordingto REOC Partners, retail rents in downtown SanAntonio average $21.69 per square feet.

Miscellaneous retail stores augment the River-center Mall, as do a significant number of restau-rants located along the Riverwalk. According to

area retail brokers, however, these facilities, inaggregate, do not account for a significant im-pact on the competitive market for retail space in the CBD.

Downtown office workers and the emerging resi-dent market also generate demand for some sup-porting convenience and service retail spacethroughout the CBD. These facilities, generallyknown as neighborhood retail centers, are locatedalong the Houston Street corridor and elsewhere.Market conditions among the close-in neighbor-hood centers are effectively weak, however, withvacancy rates around 22 percent, or 44,150 squarefeet of vacant space in an inventory of 199,500square feet.

Market-Rate HousingIncreasing the supply of market-rate rental andfor-sale housing in both the core of downtownSan Antonio and in adjacent neighborhoods is ofparamount importance. Without equivocation, thepanel strongly urges the city to focus on achievingthis goal. To this end, the panel examined avail-able market information on the emerging down-town housing stock. According to the DowntownAlliance, the downtown currently contains 950market-rate rental units. Roughly 775 units havebeen created over the past ten years, equating toaverage annual deliveries of only 78 rental unitsper year. On the positive side, the housing marketappears to be gaining momentum, with 450 unitscurrently under construction. In addition, another600 market-rate rental units have been proposedin various downtown locations.

For-sale product, not surprisingly, is limited, asdevelopers in “untested” housing markets typi-cally introduce rental products first. According tothe Downtown Alliance, the downtown containsonly 82 condominium units in scattered locations.The panel notes that information on sales pricepoints is incomplete, but the estimated averageprice of a sample of 31 units is around $165 persquare foot. Notably, the for-sale market appearsto be gaining momentum. The Downtown Alliancereports that 104 for-sale units currently are underconstruction, with sales prices averaging $175 persquare foot. One property, containing 45 unitswith a riverfront location, is projecting consider-ably higher sales levels, ranging from $225 to $300


Aldaco’s at Sunset Sta-tion, a lively Mexicanrestaurant with stagespace for performances,is popular with touristsand residents.

per square foot. A critical mass of downtown andnear-downtown housing will be necessary to en-hance the marketability of the CBD, attract newemployers and employees, and elevate the overallquality of life in adjacent neighborhoods such asthe St. Paul Gateway District.

Capturing a Competitive Share of theMarket San Antonio is blessed with many attractive sub-markets that compete to capture both existingand emerging markets. For the St. Paul GatewayDistrict, the biggest challenge to strengthening itscompetitive market position is overcoming perva-sive unfavorable stereotypes and perceptionsabout the area. The panel believes that a morepositive image can be created, based on the dis-trict’s rich history and identity. It also will be im-portant to build on several existing anchors.

Existing Commercial Assets and Connectionswith the CBDThe following uses draw patrons and reinforceeconomic connections between the St. Paul Gate-way District and the CBD, notwithstanding thebarrier of IH-37. These uses, particularly arts andentertainment, will play a critical role in helpingto dispel the perception that the Eastside is an un-attractive, dangerous place to visit.

Restaurants and Entertainment. Sunset Stationcontains two popular restaurants—Aldaco’s, offer-ing authentic Mexican cuisine, and Ruth’s ChrisSteak House, a white tablecloth steakhouse—thatserve the convention and visitor markets. Bothrestaurants advertise aggressively, maintain closecontact with hotel concierges and convention plan-ners, and provide free shuttle service for visitors.In addition, Sunset Station management has ex-panded its entertainment venues to attract localresidents with popular rock and roll and blues con-certs. Further north, the Spaghetti Warehouse isanother popular restaurant.

Lodging and Convention-Related Visitor Services.The Eastside has benefited from recent privateinvestment in two hotel properties on East Com-merce Street. The Best Western Sunset Suitesand the Holiday Inn Express are capturing someof the demand for downtown hotel rooms gener-

ated by San Antonio’s visitor industry. OtherEastside-based firms, including a major catererand a tour company, provide additional servicesfor conventioneers and visitors.

Health and Human Services. Several Eastside health-related facilities draw patients and visitors fromacross the city. These include a dialysis treatmentcenter on East Commerce Street and the Salva-tion Army facility north of St. Paul Square. Sev-eral public agencies also provide health and humanservices and other community-based support.

Humanizing the St. Paul GatewayDistrictIf the St. Paul Gateway District is to capture astrong share of emerging market and real estateopportunities, it must support and sustain certainexisting community assets. These assets are theneighborhood’s jewels; they give the area its spe-cial character and identity. Such distinctive ele-ments give the district a unique competitive ad-vantage while also humanizing the environmentand enhancing overall perceptions of the district.These assets are crucial to sustaining and improv-ing the quality of life in both the St. Paul GatewayDistrict and San Antonio as a whole.

The Carver Community Cultural CenterThe Carver Community Cultural Center, whichshould not be confused with the Carver Academy,

is first and foremost amongst these assets. Duringits long history in the neighborhood, the culturalcenter has hosted most of the giants of Americanjazz and popular music, including Louis Armstrongand Duke Ellington. While the center has had itsups and downs over the decades, it is obvious thatthe San Antonio community—both public andprivate—still honors this facility, as evidenced byrecent capital support for numerous performancesand other programs at both the academy and thecultural center.

Today, the Carver Community Cultural Center of-fers world-class dance and musical performances.The physical plant has been renovated to provideinspiring performance space, and the adminis-trative staff is highly professional. Communitygroups are able to provide a variety of programsby renting space at very low rents. The Carver De-


velopment Board—the institution’s private fund-ing arm—has stepped up, along with a solid listof corporate and foundation sponsors, to matchgovernment financial backing with sizable pri-vate investment, guaranteeing the necessary on-going support.

Private and public financial support for the CarverCommunity Cultural Center must be sustained inorder to maintain the physical plant and expandits programs. The center has succeeded in its mis-sion to provide a venue to showcase the arts andhelp educate children in the community, thus serv-ing the entire community as well as attractingvisitors from far beyond the immediate neighbor-hood. Ticket revenues and third-party rentals willnever be able to cover the center’s total operatingcosts unless ticket prices and rents are raised tolevels that would preclude the facility’s use by thecommunity at large. Thus, continued private dona-tions and public support must continue.

As aptly noted in the recent Office of CulturalAffairs Biannual Report for the City of SanAntonio, “as human beings, it is our nature towant a record of our personal experiences in life,a snapshot of time to remember and reflect.Throughout history, cultural arts have capturedthese memories . . . to provide a scrapbook for usto enjoy today and a historical legacy from whichfuture generations can learn. Through the arts,generations connect, neighbors communicate, andthe world celebrates both our commonality andour uniqueness.” This eloquently describes whyit is vital to maintain the Carver Community Cul-tural Center, not only for San Antonio’s AfricanAmerican community but also for all residents ofSan Antonio.

The Carver AcademyLocated adjacent to the Carver Community Cul-tural Center, the Carver Academy is another com-munity gem. Its attractive physical plant is a tan-gible financial and positive visual investment. Italso is a symbol of hope and resiliency for theneighborhood. St. Paul Gateway District stake-holders must explore ways to collaborate with theacademy and move forward together to providecontinuing benefits to the community as a whole.It also is important to avoid confusion betweenthe Carver Academy and the Carver Community

Above: The Carver Com-munity Cultural Centerprovides a performing artsvenue for all residents ofSan Antonio. Right: TheCarver Academy, foundedby David Robinson, pro-vides private educationalopportunities for low- andmoderate-income children.


Cultural Center. The public must be better edu-cated about the institutions’ separate nature andmissions, so that adequate funding and supportcan be sustained for both organizations.

Faith-Based OrganizationsActive faith-based organizations provide anothervaluable competitive advantage and asset forthe St. Paul Gateway District. The panel’s lim-ited time did not allow it to interview all of theactive groups, but one in particular illustrates thestrength of these organizations. The 138-year-oldSt. Paul Methodist Church and the affiliated butnondenominational, nonprofit St. Paul Area De-velopment Corporation have a fruitful relation-ship with the Alamo Community College Districtto identify and recruit promising students fromthe community.

Other OrganizationsOther organizations also are focusing on improv-ing the lives of community residents. The St.Paul Area Development Corporation is rehabili-tating a building near the Carver CommunityCultural Center and plans to create an after-school program involving other community groupsand the San Antonio Renaissance Theater topromote communication skills for children. Addi-tional St. Paul Area Development Corporationplans include building a 40-unit independent liv-ing facility that will allow aging residents to re-main in the neighborhood.

Nearby Community Assets Beyond the immediate study area, other impor-tant community assets such as the Antioch Mis-sionary Baptist Church, Mt. Zion Baptist Church,Dignowity Hill Neighborhood Association, and St.Philips College also should be engaged, nurtured,and supported to ensure the revitalization andsuccess of the St. Paul Gateway District. Each ofthese institutions contributes to the identity andrich heritage of the neighborhood in its own way,and each has current initiatives related to hous-ing, education, and community development thatare worthy of sustained support as important con-tributors to stabilizing and revitalizing the area.

Cultural TourismThe panel also recommends that cultural tourismbe promoted, safeguarded, and expanded to in-

crease the area’s vitality and enhance its appeal asa destination. Increased marketing efforts will en-sure that San Antonio residents understand thecultural assets located in the St. Paul GatewayDistrict. Expanded programs and additional de-velopment will further heighten the district’soverall visibility and help to dispel negative im-ages and misperceptions.

Defining Market PotentialThe panel’s preliminary analysis of market con-ditions and characteristics suggests strengths insome product sectors and weakened market con-ditions in others. Short- and long-term growth inpopulation, households, and employment—the dri-vers of demand—can be expected to strengthenweakened sectors and generate incremental addi-tional demand for others, such as housing. This

Houses in the DignowityHill Historic District aretypical of the area’sgrander historic homes.


analysis also indicates the critical importance ofstrengthening the downtown core, across all prop-erty types, to enhance revitalization opportunitiesin the St. Paul Gateway District.

Market-Rate HousingThe Ellis Alley “Park ‘N Ride” lots to the northof St. Paul Square offer strong redevelopment po-tential. The panel recommends that these parcelsbe redeveloped with market-rate, high-densityhousing that takes advantage of the lots’ superbviews and immediate access to downtown. Thepanel notes that such development is likely to re-quire public participation in the form of infrastruc-ture support, site preparation, and/or amenitiesthat will enhance the overall marketability for pri-vate sector investment.

Equally important, the historic Friedrich Buildingcomplex could anchor the eastern end of redevel-opment on the East Commerce Street corridor.Because of its proximity to the Carver Commu-nity Cultural Center and the Carver Academy, itsredevelopment could create a hub of activity anddevelopment. The Friedrich Building’s lowerfloors could provide office space oriented to pro-fessional services, while upper levels could be con-verted into attractive, loft-style residences. Theseunits could be targeted to San Antonio residentsseeking a more urban working and living environ-ment, thus providing an attractive alternative tosuburban housing.

The panel’s analysis suggests near-term potentialfor up to 500 market-rate housing units in the St.

Paul Gateway District, assuming several condi-tions are met. These include a focused city eco-nomic development strategy that increases down-town employment and housing, as well as publicinvestment in infrastructure and amenities in se-lected locations or projects that enhance the over-all feasibility of residential development.

Affordable Housing The panel did not estimate demand potential foradditional affordable housing units in the St. PaulGateway District. The panel’s interviews, how-ever, made it apparent that many residents favoradditional mixed-income housing as long as it ishigh quality. Mixed-priced housing would allowelderly and workforce residents with fixed ormoderate household incomes to remain in thearea, thus helping to stabilize the neighborhood.The district is well located to provide workforcehousing, particularly for those employed in thedowntown.

Office/Flex SpaceCurrent market conditions indicate that the down-town office market would benefit substantiallyfrom a proactive economic development strategythat includes business retention and recruitmentefforts to reduce the amount of vacant office spaceand enhance market opportunities for downtownservice-related retail. The panel understands thatprojects are in the works that may convert sev-eral Class B and C office buildings to residentialuses. This is a very positive step toward reducingoverall office vacancies and strengthening thedowntown’s competitive position in the region.

The panel notes that the demand potential for newoffice development in the downtown will largelybe determined by the success of these efforts. Inthe St. Paul Gateway District, opportunities foroffice space will require carefully crafted nichemarketing. This includes marketing such spaceat lower rents than those in the downtown core. In addition, demand for office space likely will begenerated by new housing development, whichcould be expected to support professional officespace for doctors, dentists, accounting and designprofessionals, business services, and the like. Thereis no doubt that San Antonio has a small but demon-strable market of design and other professionalsdesiring funky/innovative professional office space

Some renovation—muchof it related to transit service—has occurred in theEllis Alley area.


that could be accommodated through the adaptiveuse of structures such as the Friedrich Buildingand the Merchant’s Ice Building.

Other potential uses for office/flex space in the St.Paul Gateway District include allied uses that sup-port core downtown activity generators such asthe visitor/tourist market. This includes flex spacethat encompasses a range of products and tenants,from semi-industrial uses such as warehousingand distribution, catering services, document stor-age, and exhibitor services for convention events.The Merchant’s Ice Building, for example, couldprovide excellent flex/office/warehouse space toaccommodate and consolidate these uses. Flexspace in warehouse buildings also could be suit-able for the expansion of San Antonio’s emergingbioscience industries.

The panel notes that employment growth forecastfor the next ten years could be expected to gener-ate demand for additional office space. The keychallenge will be to enhance the overall market-ability of downtown San Antonio to ensure that itbenefits from future demand that translates intonew office development. A strategy focused onniche opportunities in the St. Paul Gateway District

—for example, price-sensitive design and profes-sional services firms—suggests demand on theorder of 100,000 to 130,000 square feet of profes-sional office space over the next ten years.

Hotels/LodgingThe analysis of market conditions in the area’shotel/lodging market suggests that this is a brightspot. The region’s hospitality industry is a signifi-cant economic driver, not only for the downtownbut for the entire region as well. While the panelwas not able to examine historic changes in thevisitor market, such as the growth of leisure visi-tors, convention delegates, and so forth, the sig-nificant increase in the CBD hotel inventory sug-gests that San Antonio’s visitor/convention marketsare a logical fuel for hotel room expansion.

To some extent, the St. Paul Gateway Districthas begun to benefit from the overall health of thedowntown lodging/visitor market with the con-struction of the Best Western Sunset Suites andthe Holiday Inn Express. This investment by op-erators with national franchises sends a strongsignal about the overall viability of hotel develop-ment in the district. Near-term opportunities foradditional hotel/lodging uses in the study area will

The potential for infillhousing developmentalong Hays Street shouldbe explored.


be determined largely by additional expansion ofthe downtown hospitality market. Preliminaryanalysis has identified near-term potential for anadditional 150 to 200 rooms, presuming continuedgrowth in the downtown hospitality sector. An ex-tended-stay property oriented to visiting militarypersonnel, convention delegates, and transfereesto San Antonio—as well as the region’s tourists—appears to be an appropriate product for this area.

Supporting and Destination RetailRetail opportunities in the St. Paul GatewayDistrict—particularly for convenience and service/supporting retail—will be driven largely by growth

in households. Moreover, niche or specialty retailersincreasingly are recognizing the consumer spend-ing potential of inner-city areas. Market supportfor destination retail such as restaurants in thedistrict will require more visitors coming to thedistrict from downtown. Significant attention tophysical issues such as linkages, streetscape im-provements, visibility, and frontage will help at-tract new visitors.

Locating new retail uses therefore will requirecareful consideration. Although the historic build-ings in St. Paul Square are a logical location for re-tail development, previous attempts have beenunsuccessful. Mitigating or eliminating the physi-cal and psychological barrier created by IH-37 iscritical to enhancing overall retail opportunities.As public improvements and private investmentalong East Commerce Street are completed, op-portunities for neighborhood-serving retail, suchas a dry cleaner or bank, as well as other support-ing and convenience businesses serving the needsof existing and new residents, will be strength-ened. The panel has identified roughly 25,000 to50,000 square feet of retail market potential inthe study area and the nearby Eastside over thenext ten years. As illustrated in the adjacent fig-ure, the panel’s initial market analysis suggeststhat the market will support all of the uses de-scribed above.

Summary of Market Potential

TotalUse Square Footage1 Square Footage1

Commercial 556,000

Professional office 130,000

Flex-Industrial 313,000

Hotel/Lodging2 113,000

Retail 50,000

General Retail 25,500

Food/Beverage 16,300

Leisure/Entertainment 8,200

Housing3 600,000

Total Program 1,206,0001 Figures are rounded.2 188 rooms at 600 square feet per room.3 500 housing units at 1,200 square feet per unit.


San Antonio’s close-in, east downtown areahas a history as a working class, educated,vibrant neighborhood with high-qualityhousing and community-centered busi-

nesses, schools, churches, and cultural facilities.Any new plan for the area should incorporate thishistory into a defined identity for the community,which should permeate all visual cues throughoutthe neighborhood. Doing so also will help improvemisconceptions regarding the neighborhood.

As it began its study of the St. Paul Gateway Dis-trict, the panel reviewed the available San Anto-nio planning studies relevant to its responsibili-ties. It then established a set of four framingstatements that reflects the primary strategiesnecessary to integrate all future redevelopmentactions. The panel went on to develop a series ofprinciples that it believes are essential to imple-menting these strategies. The framing statementsare as follows:





These framing statements express the qualitiesand actions required to create a sense of place.“Place” refers to more than just location. It ischaracterized by social and cultural memory; itconnotes responsiveness to human needs and scaleand presents a distinct image. This new specialplace must be actively nourished over time. It isthe quality of place that gives a community itscharacter and personality—indeed, its identity—the qualities by which it is known and which resi-dents associate with it.

Historical continuity is an important element increating a sense of place. Great places have trans-parent layers of history. History is encoded in per-

sonal memories, the housing stock, community in-stitutions, and archaeological remnants. It is fur-ther defined by street patterns, which in turn de-fine building relationships and linkages. Historygives a place texture and meaning, and thus mustbe preserved as a value-added commodity.

The four framing statements establish the direc-tion for the panel’s plan for the St. Paul GatewayDistrict. These statements are intended to betimeless and expandable, rather than contempo-rary and static. For each statement, the panel pro-vides introductory principles and proposes poli-cies and actions. The panel expects that additionalprinciples will be developed to support the processas it matures and expands. The urban design anddevelopment plan that follows the framing state-ments reflects these statements and expresseshow the panel believes the district should be or-ganized and developed.

Context AnalysisThe panel’s process of determining an approach tothe St. Paul Gateway District’s urban design andplanning issues is based on an understanding ofthe district’s challenges and assets, which grewout of an on-site survey and the panel’s inter-views. Based on these understandings, the panelsees the area’s dominant assets and challengesas follows.

Assets The district contains a wide range of existing as-sets, including the following.

The Carver Community Cultural Center and theCarver Academy. As discussed in the precedingsection, these facilities are symbolically and opera-tionally important. Woven into the residential fab-ric of the community, they provide the area with astrong cultural identity. These institutions are apositive physical node. The work and philanthropyof David Robinson in developing the academy is a

Urban Design and Planning


significant element in the high visibility and valueof this school.

Historic Housing Stock. The district’s historic hous-ing stock is a link to the past and provides texturein the residential neighborhoods. Although somehave been better maintained than others, thesedwellings attract people to the area and could be-come the backbone of a restoration movement.

Proximity to Downtown. This proximity is one ofthe area’s most valuable assets. The district isessentially an extension of the downtown that isvisually separated from the core of the city by IH-37.

St. Paul Square. This development is an early anchorin the area and is historically referential. It sets adesign standard for subsequent development.

Sunset Station. The restoration of this historicproperty completes the western edge of the corri-dor and serves as an anchor, in partnership withSt. Paul Square.

Vacant and Underutilized Land. Abundant, rea-sonably priced vacant and underutilized land is a resource that will make it easier to undertakeinfill development and assemble parcels forredevelopment.

Views. The high ground along the eastern edge ofthe study area provides relatively uninterruptedviews of the downtown skyline.

The Hays Street Bridge. This magnificent historicartifact could, when restored, become a work ofpublic art.

Cultural Memory Sites. These sites, which includethe cemeteries and La Garita—a powder store-house associated with the Alamo—have the poten-tial to extend tourism activity to the east of IH-37and into this area.

City Interest. The city’s interest in moving for-ward with plans to develop this area, as evidencedby the panel’s presence, is viewed as a positivestep toward a full commitment of resources andpolitical will.

ChallengesIn addition to these assets, however, the districtfaces a number of challenges, which include thefollowing.

Isolation. The isolating presence of both IH-37 andthe Union Pacific right-of-way (ROW) create a seg-mented environment. IH-37 is a physical, visual,and psychological barrier that separates the dis-trict from the downtown core. While the presenceof railroad activity may instill nostalgic memories

Assets and opportunities.

Cultural/Mixed-Use

Area

FriedrichBuilding

Downtown

CulturalHeritage

Site

Key:

Views

Historic housing stock/district

Study area boundary

Existing buildings

Underutilized land for development:

Primary Secondary

Illustration 1: Assets and Opportunities

Proximity to Downtown

RidgeLine

St. Paul Square

SunsetStation

East Commerce Street


of the role of trains in the development of the na-tion, the railroad tracks are now an intrusion thatdetracts from the desired ambience and character.

Need for Additional City Services. While there hasbeen significant public investment in this area, ad-ditional infrastructure investment certainly isneeded. This is evidenced by the condition of someof the housing stock, the social issues associatedwith crime, and the barriers resulting from thetransitways that bisect the community. These fac-tors are a continuing detriment to both the livabil-ity of the area and the perception of it as an enclavein the city suitable for new residents and businesses.

The Physical Environment. The following physicalelements create challenges for new development:

• Lack of Connectivity. The study area is physi-cally disconnected from the culture, energy, andexcitement of the downtown. Little seems to tiethe areas together, other than infrequent busservice and light traffic, and the study area cur-rently gains few benefits from its proximity tothe CBD.

• Visual Quality. The visual appearance of thearea signifies neglect and hopelessness. This is

surprising when one explores the history of thearea and its significance to the city, and analyzesthe physical proximity of this area to the CBD.

• Perceptions of Crime. Crime in the area is gen-erated by two forces. The first is the transitorypopulation housed nightly to capacity at the Sal-vation Army facility, a majority of whom report-edly find their way to the area as a result ofpassing freight train traffic. The second is thedecades-old drug problem, which appears to beconcentrated near the intersection of Monumen-tal and Houston streets.

Housing Stock. The area’s housing stock is of amoderately high quality, based on its age and cul-tural importance to the city. After decades of ne-glect, however, very few historically significantstructures remain. At this stage, the greatest ben-efits will be derived by safeguarding the remain-ing historic structures by restoring them on ahouse-by-house basis, with a special focus on Dig-nowity Hill.

Existing Development Patterns, Incompatible LandUses, and Tough Edge Conditions. Development inthis area has proceeded in an ad hoc manner over

Issues and challenges.East Houston Street

Key:

Spotty light industrial development patterns

Action areas

Illustration 2: Issues and Challenges* (San Antonio - Eastside)

Incompatible

Seam

-UnionPacific

RailroadROW

SocialServices

Drug TrafficSpin-off Crime

Salvation Army:Transitory Population

(Rail Ridership)

Spotty Housing Stock Conditions

Spotty Housing Stock Conditions

Cultural Memory(Carver Academy/Carver

Community Cultural Center)

Ongoing Project:Friedrich Building

UnderutilizedAlamodome

Area

PotentialDevelopment

Site

ExpandingConvention

Center

IncompatibleLand Uses

(Event Parking/Residential)


East Market Street

DISCONNECTED TRANSITIONS

Incompatible

Seam

–Interstate

Highway37


the last 25 years. There has been little impact onor change to existing land uses, however, otherthan neglect. The exceptions to this are the Alam-odome and its parking structures adjacent to resi-dences on the eastern boundary, and the smallhotel developments along the north side of EastCommerce Street.

Diminishing Cultural Memory. The cultural historyof the Eastside, specifically as it relates to theAfrican American culture of San Antonio, seemsto be diminishing and, it is feared, could be on thebrink of disappearing altogether.

An Underutilized Light Industrial Area. The landdue north of St. Paul Square, bordered by theUnion Pacific ROW on the east and the IH-37ROW to the west, represents a significant oppor-tunity for higher-density, mixed-use developmentin the future. In the meantime, however, the areahas a blighting influence on its surroundings.

Framing Statements and PrinciplesThe four framing statements and supporting prin-ciples are discussed below. Each principle is de-signed to realize the objectives of the framing

statement in an effort to recommend a redevel-opment plan for the area.

Reconnecting with the CityThe St. Paul Gateway District’s proximity todowntown/center city San Antonio is central toits revitalization. It is the relationship betweenthe district and the near Eastside that establishesthe market position of the study area. As a close-in community, the district is a major—though onlypartially defined—link between downtown SanAntonio and its eastern edge.

Economic and city/community building benefitscan accrue from the Eastside’s redefinition as a vi-brant, valued, and important place. Continuing thepattern of development from downtown will con-tribute to the sense of strength and economic andspatial vitality in the study area.

Block-to-block visual connectivity along majorstreets provides a pleasant pedestrian experienceand establishes a cadence to vehicular movement.Consistent urban design vocabularies and strate-gies contribute to this quality of connectivity. Useof the following principles will help reconnect thedistrict with the city:

More than 100 acres ofcemetery land define theeastern border of thestudy area.


• Tourism attractions in the district should be in-corporated into a citywide system of attractions.These attractions include the Carver Commu-nity Cultural Center and the Carver Academy;La Garita, the eastern garrison of the Alamo; andthe area’s cemeteries and churches, all of whichshould be supported and made visible as historicresources. The Old San Antonio City Cemeter-ies Historic District, Eastside Cemetery Com-plex, Master Plan of September 1990 offers ap-propriate documentation of these attractions.

• A “gateway” entry into the district along EastCommerce Street should be developed. Thisgateway should reinforce the importance of theSt. Paul Square/Sunset Station area and theblocks to its east.

• Public transportation should be enhanced to en-courage east/west movement between the East-side and the downtown core.

• The intrusion of IH-37 and freight train traf-fic along the Union Pacific ROW should bemitigated.

• The edge gateway blocks of East CommerceStreet east of IH-37 should reflect the character

and uses of downtown, including retail, enter-tainment and dining, personal services, housing,and programmed open space.

• The rehabilitation of the Hays Street Bridge—as a work of public art, an historic resource, andan important east/west pedestrian link—shouldproceed.

• Planning and development efforts for the St.Paul Gateway District and other downtownareas should be considered of equal importance.

• Redevelopment plans for the HemisFair Park/Alamodome area must consider and include ex-pansion plans for the Henry B. Gonzalez Con-vention Center and their combined effect on theSunset Station/St. Paul Square precinct.

Humanizing the CorridorGreat urban places are designed in ways that sup-port a sense of community or belonging, at a scalethat uses pleasing pedestrian environments to en-courage safe, human interactions.

The character of the host environment influencesthe streetscape and adjacent frontages. Greatstreets reflect the physical, cultural, and social

Streetscape improvementsalong East CommerceStreet at St. Paul Squareillustrate the benefit ofincorporating street trees,lighting, and distinctivewalkway materials.


contexts within which they exist. They are a cele-bration of the pattern and purpose of the city, andmust be thought of and designed as such. In thevocabulary of great streets, the intersections of18th and Vine in Kansas City and Seventh and T in Washington, D.C.; Pennsylvania Avenue infront of the White House in Washington, D.C.;Copenhagen’s Strogät; and Paris’s Champs Ely-sees suggest immediately recognizable imagesthat are associated with known places and activi-ties. Use of the following principles will help hu-manize the East Commerce Street corridor:

• All of East Commerce Street should be con-verted to accommodate two-way traffic.

• The East Commerce Street ROW should be re-designed to enhance and support a pedestrianenvironment conducive to free and easy walkingon appropriately scaled and designed sidewalks.

• The new streetscape must include a significant“greening” component to soften and humanizethe pedestrian environment.

• Streetscape design should include componentsscaled to increase intimacy, including lighting,

plantings, and the like. It also should pay atten-tion to view corridors, both to the west and tothe east.

• Urban design details that tell a unique “San An-tonio story” should be incorporated. This can bedone by using certain materials, textures, col-ors, and messages at ground level, eye level,and on upper stories.

• The now typical live/work model of ground-floorcommercial space below upper-level residentialunits should be incorporated to activate thestreet 24 hours a day.

• Integrated signage and lighting systems mustbe given serious attention, as elements of a co-hesive wayfinding system and a uniquestreetscape image.

• Clear, nonreflective glass should be used in alldevelopment—especially grade-level retailspace—to the maximum extent possible, tomake interior activity visible from the streetenvironment.

This streetscape is typicalof those in the SunsetStation/St. Paul Squarearea.


Investing in the DistrictA serious commitment of high-priority resourcesand political will and capital, at all levels, must beinvested in the redevelopment of the St. PaulGateway District. City officials and communitystakeholders must organize to ensure continuingmomentum and directed coordination in this ef-fort. Use of the following principles will help in-crease investment in the district:

• A comprehensive urban design analysis/plan di-vided into appropriate subareas should be pre-pared as a preface to any public improvementprogram. The analysis should set forth timelessprinciples and qualitative indices, rather thanspecific applications. Particular attention shouldbe given to the massing implications of zoningallowances.

• A comprehensive public site improvement in-vestment strategy should be developed that isaligned with the urban design analysis/plan.

• Areas currently zoned for light industry shouldbe reclassified as mixed use to incorporate fu-ture residential, office, retail, and entertain-ment uses. Zoning should allow these uses to

follow a transitional development period thatmay include warehouses, flex space, and/or in-cubator business spaces.

Establishing a New Focus and a New Identity The qualities through which the community isknown, both internally and externally, should bederived from a carefully crafted, managed, andpromoted image, supported by a changed realityand perception. The sum of planning and develop-ment actions will frame and advance this newimage. Through a directed effort, all these actionswill converge to establish a new focus and a newidentity for the district.

• The whole of the urban design and planning ef-fort should be intended to create a new placewithin an existing community/district. The powerof urban design to create community or a senseof place is fully realized when it establishes aunique image.

• The city should establish a design review pro-cess to assure high-quality, contextually sensi-tive development. The process should operatewithin design standards evolving from theurban design analysis.

Signage regulationswould improve the visual landscape.

Urban Design and Development PlanThe panel’s urban design and development planfor the St. Paul Gateway District is a combinationof development strategies and the application ofthe urban design principles discussed above. Theelements of the plan include grouping parcels/blocks,activities, and adjacent elements for action/consid-eration, and then applying the urban design prin-ciples to every action. The action elements of theplan for various areas follow.

• The segment of East Commerce Street from IH-37 to the cemetery edge. These blocks should bedesigned to have a unified yet variegated image.Appropriately scaled facades and landscape ele-ments can define the street space. Unified infor-mation and lighting systems should be installed.Housing units over retail space will encourage a24-hour, active street environment. Adoption ofa neighborhood conservation overlay districtcould encourage the use of these design elements.

• The blocks and parcels east of IH-37 to the rail-road ROW, from Nolan Street to East Com-merce Street, including St. Paul Square andSunset Station. These groups of blocks shouldreflect the land uses of the adjacent downtownarea as well as urban residences. Strategiesthat provide height and density bonuses shouldbe developed to encourage block-to-block in-vestment.

• The area between Nolan and East Commercestreets, and from the railroad ROW to NorthMesquite Street. This is a transitional area inwhich height and bulk are reduced, from thedowntown edge to residential land uses.

• The Dignowity Hill Historic District. A concen-trated historic restoration effort should be initi-ated in this district, rather than dispersedacross the larger study area.

• The node created by the Carver CommunityCultural Center, the Carver Academy, and theFriedrich Building. The concentrated successof the Carvers sets a tone that parallels the am-bitions of the Friedrich. The city should investin the development of this joint effort.

• Historic cemeteries and other historic re-sources, including the La Garita site. An oppor-tunity exists to extend tourism activities fromdowntown to the St. Paul Gateway District,which would work to the advantage of economicdevelopment in the district.

• The expansion of the convention center to theeast, taking into consideration the HemisFairPark grounds, the Alamodome, and potentialadditional sports venues. Toward this end, theHemisFair Park Area Master Plan completed in2004 should be consulted, particularly when ad-


Action areas.

1

2

3

3

4

4

7

8

9

1011

12

65

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

UnionPacific

RailroadROW

InterstateHighway 37


Action Area Boundary

Key: Convention Center expansion area Urban design continuity Downtown expansion opportunity Transitional development zone Interstate Highway 37 Union Pacific Railroad ROW Hays Street Bridge Dignowity Hill Historic Preservation District Areawide code enforcement, rehabilitation, and restoration Cultural/mixed-use area (Carver Academy, Carver Community Cultural Center, Friedrich Building) Historic/heritage resources East Commerce Street District

Primary Focus Areas East Commerce Street District Downtown expansion opportunity


dressing the edges of the area and connectivityissues.

• The housing environment and housing stock.The existing historic district, Dignowity Hill,should be the focus of improvements. An ef-fort to enforce code violations and encouragerehabilitation activities should be undertaken in the historic district as well as in the largerstudy area.

• The on-grade railroad ROW. The short-termgoal should be to eliminate freight traffic andallow only Amtrak traffic. In the longer term,rerouting all rail traffic to the western spur willrelieve the district of the current intrusion ofrail traffic.

• The IH-37 expressway. Creating a surface-levelboulevard and greenway is an immediate strat-egy that could be used to overcome the barrierof an interstate highway elevated on bermedland. A longer-range solution is to bury the in-terstate and use the newly created surface fordevelopment.

• East Commerce Street from center city to IH-37. Continuous lighting and signage systemscould create a transition to the St. Paul Gate-way District. This image should be continuedinto the district along East Commerce Street.

• The Hays Street Bridge. As a historic icon, theHays Street Bridge can become a significantwork of public art and should be preserved. Thelanding areas of the span should be redevelopedto create a distinct precinct.

The Sunset Station depotbuilding, where Amtrak islocated, is recognized forits Spanish architecture.

Left and below: The HaysStreet Bridge, which pro-vides access over the rail-road tracks, demonstratesthe width of the barriercreated by the tracks. Thebridge must be renovatedand transformed into a safepedestrian connection.


East Commerce corridor and in the mixed-usecorridor described above;

• Establish an emerging industries center to bet-ter capture growing biomedical and informationtechnology clusters from across the city;

• Create a parcel-to-parcel linkage plan to guideresources generated via the real estate develop-ment process to this area; and

• Build upon the district’s historic strength as asingle-family residential neighborhood to helpcreate a mixed-income community.

Humanizing the East Commerce StreetCorridorThe Best Western Sunset Suites represents animportant investment easily seen by anyone en-tering the study area from the downtown alongEast Commerce Street. The panel recognizes thatthe business plan for this hotel includes its valueas an overflow location for CBD hotels and that itis competitively priced relative to the CBD hotels.The panel offers the following suggestions:

• No future hotel development should take placeeast of the Holiday Inn Express on East Com-merce Street.

• Development of a mix of retail, residential, cul-tural, and institutional uses should be encour-aged east of the Holiday Inn Express.

• The three structures adjacent to East Com-merce Street to the north—the Carver Acad-emy, the Carver Community Cultural Center,and the Friedrich Building—should be linked ina campus-like setting. The design and construc-tion standards exemplified by both the CarverAcademy and the Carver Community CulturalCenter should be followed in the continuing ren-ovation of the Friedrich Building. The EastCommerce Street site on which a two-level

It is clear to the panel that the Eastside neigh-borhood’s St. Paul Gateway District has beenneglected in the city’s economic developmentagenda. Despite this perceived neglect, consid-

erable potential exists for the redevelopment ofthis vital district.

Development strategies are tools that can be usedto accelerate revitalization. These tools are bothtactical and strategic in nature. The goal is to usepublic sector resources, both capital and regula-tory, in concert with private sector resources torevitalize and transform the district throughredevelopment.

A necessary component of development strategiesin neighborhoods such as the St. Paul GatewayDistrict is the need to reach consensus amongmembers of the development community so thatrisky ventures can be planned and executed and asuccessful course of redevelopment can occur. Tothis end, city stakeholders need to agree upon cer-tain principles, including the following:

• Reconnect the St. Paul Gateway District withthe CBD;

• Humanize the East Commerce Street corridor,including certain street and sidewalk improve-ments;

• Continue public investment in front-end im-provements in this area to induce long-termprivate investment;

• Rezone the area to encourage more compatibleland uses and set the framework for future de-velopment and redevelopment;

• Establish a mixed-use, high-density develop-ment corridor between IH-37 and the railroadtracks;

• Utilize incentive zoning measures targeted tothe two key redevelopment areas along the

Development Strategies


parking structure has been proposed should bereserved for open space and the garage shouldbe relocated to an adjacent site.

• The city should fund an origin/destination studyto gain a better understanding of how commu-nity residents make certain trips—work, recre-ation, education, medical, and so forth—and bywhich modes of transportation they travel, sothat their travel needs can be integrated intodevelopment strategies.

• The historic and current pattern of single-familyhomes should be retained and strengthened asan important characteristic of the neighbor-hood. In addition, residential revitalization stra-tegies should focus on achieving a mixed-incomecommunity.

Investing in the DistrictThe panel’s review process strongly indicates thatthe study area is underfunded by both public andprivate sector investment. On the public sectorside, certain capital investment strategies and

regulatory tools can help accelerate revitalizationin this neighborhood.

Public Capital and Regulatory SupportThe area has an immediate need for an estimated$15 million to $20 million of investment. Currently,approximately $5.0 to $6.5 million is being in-vested in capital projects along both East Com-merce and East Houston streets. This fundingcomes from a city capital improvement budget of$500 million to be spread out over the ten councildistricts. In the past five years, Council District 2has received a significant portion of this budget.

The Council District 2 allocation of community de-velopment block grant (CDBG) and U.S. Depart-ment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME)funds in the FY 2004/2005 budget of just under$30 million is $1.2 million, not all of which is to beinvested in the study area.

The panel concluded that there is an immediateneed to rezone this area to achieve better land usecompatibility and performance standards. Thecurrent zoning appears to be a collection of zoningclassifications that are not appropriate for the cur-

The Friedrich Building willbe developed in phasesas a mixed-use projectthat has the potential tobecome the easternanchor for the corridor’sredevelopment.


rent uses and are entirely inconsistent with therecent Arena District/Eastside Community Plan.Rezoning also offers the city an opportunity toemploy more contemporary zoning approaches,which could include incentives to encourage cer-tain types of development along the East Com-merce Street corridor as well as in the proposedmixed-use, high-density district between IH-37and the railroad tracks.

Like all redevelopment/revitalization efforts, thechallenge also involves proactively mobilizing exist-ing public financing tools such as enterprise zoneincentives, empowerment zone incentives, histor-ically underutilized business zone opportunities,incentive funds for targeted industries, industrialrevenue bonds, various small business services,and workforce development assistance. Particu-larly appropriate is Chapter 380 of the Local Gov-ernment Code, which provides legislative author-ity for municipalities to establish a program tomake loans and grants that promote state andlocal economic development and stimulate busi-ness and commercial activity. Such authorityshould be vigorously utilized as part of the studyarea’s development strategies.

In contrast, the panel concluded that the currenttax increment financing (TIF) district, whichencompasses the study area, probably is not aneffective tool to directly support and focus revi-talization strategies. The current TIF districtencompasses a far larger area than the St. PaulGateway District. According to materials re-viewed by the panel, there are no programmedimprovements for reinvestment of TIF funds inthe St. Paul Gateway District, even though thedistrict currently is—and is expected to continueto be—one of the prime generators of TIF monies.In the panel’s opinion, this is a fundamental imbal-ance that leads to the conclusion that either theSt. Paul Gateway District should be removed fromthe larger, existing TIF district or the TIF districtas a whole should be abandoned.

A far more productive approach in the short termis to use tax abatement incentives. This strategycould be aggressively pursued in the early yearsto support and direct private investment. The useof tax abatement incentives for new developmentcould be heavily front-loaded for early private de-

velopment projects and then tapered down as ad-ditional private development occurs.

Private Sector InitiativesAmong the existing private sector initiatives inthe study area, the panel is encouraged by the re-vitalization plans for the Friedrich Building. Thepanel is cautiously optimistic that this mixed-use,office and residential project can succeed if timelyand appropriate public support is forthcoming. Aphased approach seems reasonable for this project,although the developer should seriously considerreducing the square footage to be included in thefinal building footprint. The city also should nego-tiate an amenities package with the developer inreturn for city support of this critical project.

The city also should support and encourage thedevelopment of the Oscar Eason Senior Mixed-Use Center on East Commerce Street, acrossfrom the Friedrich Building. This apartment,retail, community center, and office developmentfor seniors is seeking HUD funding and seems tohave a capable design, developer, and lendingteam. The project’s existing retail tenants haveindicated a desire to occupy the newly built-outspace once it is completed. The developer, in con-cert with the city, needs to work out a relocationscheme for these retail tenants so that they cancontinue to operate during construction, with thegoal of relocating them to the new space when itis completed.

The St. Paul Area Development Corporationhas developed both a strategic plan for area de-velopment and conceptual plans for a 40-unit in-dependent living facility in the area. It does notyet have site control, and the city has raised somequestions about the capacity of this new non-profit developer.

The development team for the Friedrich Buildingalso controls the Merchant’s Ice Building. Theteam has abandoned its plans to transform thisbuilding into a telecom center. The site should beconsidered as a possible location for flex space,perhaps for catering, entertainment, exhibit sup-port services, mill work, carpentry, electricalwork, and so forth, as well as for biotech or infor-mation technology uses.


Financing tools being utilized for these privatesector projects include various HUD programs,city business and economic development incentive(BEDI) grants, new market tax credits (NMTCs),historic tax credits, and loan guarantees.

An Emerging Industries CenterThe city needs to proactively guide the expandingbiomedical and information technology industryclusters to the study area. The panel recommendsthat Phase I of this strategy utilize a site such asthe Merchant’s Ice Building as the location for anemerging industries center, primarily for biomed-ical firms and secondarily for information technol-ogy ones. The center would function as a businessincubator and would provide flexible space andshared business amenities for new companies. Asthese companies expand, they can be expected todevelop additional biomedical/information technol-ogy facilities within the district. It is important tonote that similar emerging industry centers inother locales have been funded by federal appro-priations. The panel estimates that up to 200,000square feet of space could be available at this loca-tion for such an initiative.

The panel also recommends that the city considerencouraging the development of flex space forcatering and entertainment uses serving the CBDhospitality sector. A possible Phase II of anemerging industries development strategy couldconsist of such uses, built on or around the vacantsix-acre Budweiser site.

Education and TrainingThe city of San Antonio has taken great strides inadvancing a biomedical education and trainingagenda. Curriculum development is either under-way or in place at a wide range of educational lev-els, from the fifth grade through higher education.Innovative magnet schools have been establishedthat can support curriculum in the health care andlife sciences areas. These types of activities shouldbe encouraged to locate within the St. Paul Gate-way District.

Mixed-Use, Density Incentive DistrictsIn concert with the complete rezoning of the St.Paul Gateway District, the panel recommendsthat the city create two separate mixed-use zon-ing incentive districts. The first would be a high-density district in the area between IH-37 and the

The Merchant’s Ice Build-ing could be redevelopedas flex space for a varietyof business ventures.


railroad tracks. The second would be along EastCommerce Street. In both districts, the citywould establish an as-of-right base zoning. Thiswould cover use, height, and density or floor/arearatio (FAR). The incentive could be stepped so that,for an initial increment of density and height, de-sign standards would increase, together with a re-quirement for a mix of at least three types of landuses. For an additional increment in height anddensity, other public objectives—such as work-force housing, parks and open space, or adoptingand co-investing with a community developmentcorporation (CDC)—would be required.

The panel recommends that the city consider al-lowing the highest densities in the area betweenIH-37 and the railroad tracks. A base height of sixfloors would be appropriate in this area, with adensity and height incentive to step up in incre-ments of five floors, to a maximum height of 16stories. At each incentive step, design standardsand collateral investment in public objectiveswould be required as the incentive quid pro quo.

For the East Commerce Street corridor, thebase height could vary, starting with the highestbase closest to the railroad tracks and taperingdown to the east. A base height of three to fourstories would be appropriate here, with incen-tives stepped in one- or two-floor increments. Thecity of Fort Worth has successfully employed partof this strategy in its Central City CommercialCorridors Revitalization Strategy.

The panel recommends that the city carefully re-view the approaches other municipalities—eitherin Texas or elsewhere—have employed to craft in-centive zoning districts that incorporate the mostcontemporary practices. It then could customizethese approaches to meet the needs of the St. PaulGateway District.

Parcel-to-Parcel Linkage: Guiding Prosperity tothe Needy NeighborhoodAnother important component of the panel’s rec-ommended development strategies is a parcel-to-parcel linkage plan. The goal of such a plan is toguide real estate development to the East Com-merce Street corridor by linking it with develop-ment opportunities in the CBD or in the proposedmixed-use, high-density district. Attendant to

this plan is a community benefits package thatcaptures some portion of building net operatingincome (NOI), resale, and refinancing proceeds forcommunity development uses. This type of in-novative linkage plan was pioneered in Boston,where a downtown parcel was linked to a parcelin the needy Roxbury community. To date, Boston’splan has yielded a fully leased, 36-story office towerin the financial district and a nine-story, fullyleased office building in Roxbury with a multilevelparking structure, plus more than $20 million incommunity benefits.

San Antonio is a growing city with a good mixof industries. The challenge for the city is to re-direct some of its growth to the long-neglectedEastside neighborhood. Such an economic devel-opment strategy stands to benefit not only thisneighborhood and the central business district,but the entire metropolitan area as well. In orderto effectively carry out such an effort, it is impor-tant that a viable implementation plan be adoptedby those affected by these changes. The Imple-mentation section of this report details a plan thattakes into account the market potential, urbanplanning, and design and development strategiessuggested above.

Transportation IssuesPhysical barriers in the St. Paul Gateway Districtlimit how the study area is linked to the CBD. Al-though it is not impossible to get from one areaof the city to the other, the connection is difficultto maneuver and leads to the perception of thestudy area as isolated. This situation can be over-come by improving vehicular, pedestrian, andtransit linkages. It will be difficult to create a suc-cessful neighborhood without first addressingthese challenges.

Specific connectivity issues therefore must be addressed. Connectivity relates to the ability ofstudy area residents to travel conveniently totheir desired destinations. They should be ableto reach destinations such as shopping, dry clean-ing, and service stations without leaving theneighborhood, and they should be able to reachthe downtown without undue confusion. Linking


the study area to the CBD will require adjustingstreet patterns.

The limited linkage to the CBD does not just af-fect the ability of study area residents to havereasonable access to the CBD. Equally importantis the number of trips generated within the CBDthat require easily understood vehicular and pedes-trian paths to the retail and entertainment usesalong the East Commerce Street corridor and tothe light industrial area north of St. Paul Square.Residential and industrial users rely mainly on ve-hicular travel, whereas shoppers—particularlythose visiting St. Paul Square—require an attrac-tive pedestrian environment. A good example of asuccessful connection is the direct vehicular andpedestrian access among the Alamodome, the con-vention center, and downtown.

Interstate Highway 37 is a visual barrier that, sur-prisingly, has a reasonable number of openings.Five underpasses—at Durango Boulevard, Market/Montana, East Commerce, Houston, and Nolanstreets—connect downtown to the city’s nearEastside. The problem is not the number of link-ages, but rather the imbalance in terms of volumeand the design of these openings.

The volume imbalance is created by the IH-37interchange ramps. All ramps seem, for the mostpart, to direct travel west—toward the downtown—on East Commerce Street. The projected vol-umes of traffic moving west on East CommerceStreet are almost six times higher than the vol-umes of the other east/west streets. The systemneeds to spread this traffic among all of thestreets mentioned above.

Market and Commerce streets support this trafficvolume imbalance, together with the preferentialdirection of IH-37 traffic to the west. CommerceStreet is one-way westbound with five lanes be-ginning at Elm Street. Market Street is one-wayeastbound and narrows from five lanes to threeunder IH-37. The route is confusing and difficultfor unfamiliar drivers to navigate. In addition,eastbound movement on Market Street has verylimited capacity with regard to direct access to St.Paul Square. One must travel eastbound on Mar-ket Street and then connect with a northbound

frontage lane under IH-37 to reach an eastboundlane at Commerce Street.

The other transportation element that contributesto this volume imbalance is the awkward flow oftraffic from IH-37 to westbound East CommerceStreet. There is a single westbound lane on EastCommerce Street under IH-37, separated by araised median that accepts traffic from MarketStreet via a northbound lane of IH-37. The distrib-ution of traffic along these westbound lanes ofEast Commerce Street, under the IH-37 struc-ture, is unbalanced.

All this has the unintended effect of creating anunfriendly pedestrian and vehicular corridoralong East Commerce Street. The unfriendlinessis not due only to the moving lanes of traffic; therealso is no pedestrian path on the south side of thestreet. The walking distance from Bowie Streetto St. Paul Square is more than 1,000 linear feet.This walk is further burdened by long intersectioncrossings that create an extremely sterile envi-ronment, devoid of artwork or any refuge fromthe extreme San Antonio heat. The pedestrianpathway, together with vehicular circulation,must be redesigned.

Although the other streets that pass under IH-37do not experience the traffic volume nor have theunfriendly pedestrian paths found along EastCommerce Street, the principles and solutionsproposed for East Commerce Street are applica-ble to all these other corridors as well.

Linkage RecommendationsThe panel suggests six short-term/midterm solu-tions and one long-term solution to improve link-ages between the CBD and the St. Paul SquareGateway District.

The short- and midterm improvements are inter-related, although they could be most logically im-plemented in two phases. The long-term alterna-tive would not simply improve linkage, but ratherwould be a roadway plan to fully integrate theEastside with the CBD.

East Commerce Street from Cherry Street to theeast end of the study area at Palmetto Street is in


• Extend the depressed section of Market Streetas needed to maintain the separate pedestrianconnection to the Alamodome; and

• Construct covered pedestrian pathways—orwalkways that use landscaping to protect pedes-trians from the elements—that connect to theAlamodome and other walkways.

Phase Three: The Long-Term SolutionThe long-term solution is to remove a portion ofIH-37 from the interstate system, between Inter-state Highway 35 (IH-35) on the north and U.S.Highway 90 (U.S. 90)/Interstate Highway 10 (IH-10) to the south, and convert it to a boulevard orgateway design. IH-37 now ends at IH-35, whereit becomes Federal Highway 281. The panel pro-poses that IH-37 be terminated at U.S. 90/IH-10.Traffic heading north or south would be divertedto either IH-35 or Interstate Highway 440 viaU.S. 90/IH-10. This would allow a smoother tran-sition of downtown expansion to the east. In addi-tion, eliminating this section of IH-37 would re-move the route that bisects the loop around thedowntown and the Eastside area—defined by IH-35 to the west and north, with Interstate Highway410 to the east and U.S. 90/IH-10 to the south.

The abandoned section of IH-37 section would beconverted to a ground-level boulevard at gradeto just north of Nolan Street, and then return toan elevated roadway as it approaches IH-35. Al-though the number of lanes on the boulevardshould be determined by transportation modeling,it appears likely that a six-lane divided roadwaywith a wide, landscaped median and generouslandscaping along the sides of the roadway wouldbe appropriate.

Aggressive public efforts will be required to makethese changes happen. Rezoning will be necessaryto encourage land use compatibility. The creationof incentive zones with targeted public investmentwill, in turn, lead to increased private investment.These efforts need to merge so that the panel’srecommended changes can be instituted.

poor condition. The needs along this section of thecorridor do not relate to capacity improvement,since the traffic volumes along this segment ofEast Commerce Street are moderate. Neverthe-less, improvements to East Commerce Street canserve many functions. The street carries traffic,serves adjacent properties, defines the visualform, and accommodates pedestrians. The im-provements to the corridor recommended by the panel attempt to balance these functions.

East Commerce Street should become a two-lane,divided roadway. Left-turn lanes should be pro-vided only at major intersections with limited me-dian openings. Beginning east of Cherry Street,East Commerce should feature wide sidewalksand, depending on the street face, either parallelparking or landscaping. Parallel parking is moreappropriate along major streets; less parkingshould be located along the side streets.

Phase One: Short-Term SolutionsThe panel recommends the following short-termsolutions:

• Streetscape improvements along East Com-merce Street, from Cherry Street to the east;

• Conversion of East Commerce and Marketstreets from one-way to two-way travel; and

• Conversion of the IH-37 ramp connections atEast Commerce Street to a two-way condition,so that traffic can travel either east or west.

Phase Two: Midterm SolutionsThe following midterm improvements would occuronce the convention center is expanded. The re-alignment of Market Street to merge with Mon-tana Street is a typical improvement for an urbaninterchange. This configuration is applicable to alleast/west roads leading to IH-37, and would pro-vide for a better balance of traffic.

• Build a collector/distributor interchange config-uration parallel to IH-37 from north of NolanStreet to Durango Boulevard;


Organizational Structure The panel considered the organization and pur-pose of existing entities before recommending thecreation of a community action committee (CAC)to foster the essential ingredients of communitywill, resources, and leadership. The panel specifi-cally rejected another layer of purely public sectororganization and oversight for the implementationof its recommendations. It is the panel’s opinionthat a classic, solely publicly sponsored redevelop-ment program for the St. Paul Gateway Districtwould add an unnecessary layer of institutionalbureaucracy and that such a purely public entitywould compete for resources within an alreadyconstrained public sector.

Existing EntitiesSeveral well-established neighborhood-based or-ganizations already exist within the St. Paul Gate-way District. These neighborhood associationsand community development corporations havecommon goals. None, however, are comprehen-sively focused on the overall area. These groupsneed to form a cohesive and coordinated forcewith independent funding resources.

Under current policy, the city of San Antonioneighborhood planning process expects a neigh-borhood association to advocate for public im-provements through a neighborhood plan. Theneighborhood associations in the area include theDignowity Hill, Nevada Street/Denver Heights,Jefferson Heights and Historic Gardens, and Har-vard Place/Eastlawn associations. The commer-cial area along East Commerce Street is not repre-sented by any kind of association. These factionsneed to be brought together so that they canspeak with one voice that represents the inter-ests of the entire community. A stronger means ofcommunication throughout the community as wellas with the city needs to be developed. Atlanta’sneighborhood planning unit structure is an exam-ple of an approach that gives residents an effec-

The panel’s assessment of the market poten-tial, its planning and urban design recom-mendations, and its development strategiesfor the study area culminate in a set of rec-

ommendations for implementation. This section ofthe report deals with structural organization andimplementation tools designed to address thepanel’s four major framing statements and accom-panying principles.

To reiterate, these framing statements are recon-necting with the city, humanizing the corridor, in-vesting in the district, and establishing a newfocus and a new identity. In addition, the panel de-fines a redevelopment timeline for the study area.Further, the panel has identified several specificprinciples, consistent with the framing statements,that provide additional guidelines for the imple-mentation of the panel’s recommendations. Theseinclude the following:

• Link public investment to benefits for residentsand stakeholders in the St. Paul Gateway Dis-trict. This concept is central to the notion of“value added.”

• Build on the community’s existing assets.

• Establish meaningful and productive relation-ships with residents and stakeholders.

• Invest in social capital. Support coalitionsamong stakeholders, neighborhood associations,churches, businesses, and cultural interests.

• Develop a broad-based and ongoing system toinclude community residents and stakeholdersin all aspects of planning and implementation.

• Recognize that development objectives aremore important than the development process.

Implementation


tive voice regarding land use, zoning, public fund-ing, and the like.

The Proposed Community Action Committee No mechanism currently exists for implementa-tion of the panel’s overall strategy and specificrecommendations for the revitalization of the St.Paul Gateway District. As a result, previous plan-ning efforts and recommendations have not beenimplemented and, with a few notable exceptions,widespread positive change has yet to occur in thearea. The number of plans that have been devel-oped and the number of programs that the city ofSan Antonio has designated to assist urban areascontrast greatly with the activity that has oc-curred in the study area. In order to change thisdynamic, a better match is needed between theplanning effort and actual development in thecommunity.

To address the overall organizational structure forthe revitalization of the St. Paul Gateway District,the panel recommends that the city create a com-munity action committee (CAC) to oversee pri-vate development and public improvements in thisarea. The new entity would be proactive, respon-sive, and accountable to the city, residents, andstakeholders. The CAC would serve as the over-sight and monitoring entity for the city’s commit-ments and public investments in the community.The CAC would be of a finite duration, perhaps di-recting redevelopment activity for five years orso, and would be disbanded once significantprogress is underway.

In summary, the panel suggests the following op-erational parameters. The CAC would:

• Be established by an ordinance of the San Anto-nio City Council. The ordinance would specifythe membership of the CAC and the frameworkfor its responsibilities and tenure.

• Become the city’s agent for organizing and exe-cuting an overall development strategy for thearea. At the same time, it is not expected tohave a formal staff. It would rely on dedicatedstaff resources from within the city’s existingdepartments, particularly the planning, eco-nomic development, and neighborhood actiondepartments.

• Likely require additional public support, in theform of resources from the health department,VIA Metropolitan Transit, the public works andcode compliance departments, the housing andcommunity development department, the TexasWorkforce Commission, and/or the San AntonioIndependent School District.

• Act as a liaison between those representing theneeds of the neighborhood and elected officials.The CAC also would provide the vehicle—both operationally and financially—to leverageneighborhood organizations and their projectsand priorities.

Operationally, the CAC initially would be chargedwith the following mandate:

• Create a strategic action or business plan forthe first two years of operation. This wouldfocus exclusively on an action/task-orientedagenda for private development. The actionplan would identify the priorities, public fund-ing commitments, and other resources neededto sustain private development. It also wouldaddress the priorities and needs of existingneighborhood development organizations andserve as the catalyst to get projects now in thepipeline to completion, supported by public in-vestment. The strategic action or business planalso would address the following:

• Implementation of residential, commercial,and retail development, as well as infrastruc-

The ticket booth at SunsetStation provides ticketsfor events held at thepavilion.


ture improvements and selected public in-vestments;

• Design review standards and guidance;

• An inclusive and ongoing public involvementprocess; and

• Milestones to measure progress of public in-vestments in the community, with prioritiesset by the CAC through the plan process.

• Bring its action/business plan back to the citycouncil for approval. Once the plan is approved,the CAC would be required to report periodi-cally to the city council on its progress, with fullreporting required each year.

• Provide direct funding for the support of CACoperations and startup planning and project-related activities via its city council authoriza-tion. The panel specifically does not recommendthat the CAC be freestanding financially fromthe city at the outset; rather, its expenses andother support—including office space, conferencerooms, out-of-pocket expenses, operational over-head, and the like—would be funded by existingcity departments.

• Be given the authority to review designs andprovide recommendations on prospective pub-licly funded/incentivized neighborhood projectsand determine whether they are appropriatewithin the context of the community.

The panel suggests that the CAC comprise nomore than five to seven members. Illustratively,these would include:

• A city council representative for the area;

• A representative from a neighborhood-basedreligious, educational, or cultural institution;

• A resident;

• A design professional;

• A neighborhood business owner;

• A representative of a neighborhood association;and

• A representative of a neighborhood-based CDC.

The individuals appointed to the CAC should ei-ther serve on a volunteer basis or receive a mod-est annual stipend. They would be the equivalentof a board of directors. The CAC would be as-signed dedicated city staff support and resources,and this staff would be responsible for the CAC’sday-to-day operations and accountable to the CACas a whole.

Implementing the Panel’sRecommendationsThe panel delineated its recommendations for eachframing principle, emphasizing the need to capital-ize on the St. Paul Gateway District’s physicalproximity to the downtown, the need for street-scape improvements of a more pedestrian scale,and the creation of a mixed-income neighborhoodwith its own special identity.

Reconnecting with the CityTo capitalize on the district’s physical proximityand historical connection to the CBD, the panelrecommends that the city undertake the followingactions:

• Form a public/private partnership with thebusiness community—specifically the hospital-ity industry—that would benefit from the cul-tural reconnection of the district to the down-town. The creation of a larger, more extensiveand inclusive area of historic significance re-lated to the Alamo and La Garita and the richheritage of this African American community

The ceremonial entranceto the Department of Vet-erans Affairs cemetery islocated just east of thestudy area.

offers opportunities for investment to research,interpret, and reveal the city’s rich historic fab-ric. This can be translated into an effective her-itage tourism effort and, ultimately, additionalovernight stays by visitors to San Antonio.

• Utilize the Carver Community Cultural Centerin a seamless extension of downtown cultural of-ferings and activities.

Humanizing the CorridorIn order to incorporate human- and pedestrian-scale improvements into the East CommerceStreet corridor, the panel recommends the follow-ing actions:

• The city should adopt a set of design standardsfor the area, in conjunction with the comprehen-sive rezoning of the city.

• A CAC should provide design consultation andrecommendations.

• Design elements that reflect the history andcontext of the neighborhood should be used.

• Visual cues should be developed that hint atwhat lies beyond in the larger community.

• Improvements to rights-of-way should includeupgrading or adding sidewalks, providing high-quality lighting, and installing appropriatestreet furniture such as bus stop shelters.

• Cultural activities in the district should be en-hanced and encouraged.

Investing in the DistrictThe city should use whatever resources it has atits disposal to ensure that the study area is rede-veloped as a mixed-income neighborhood of choice.In order for this to become reality, however, cur-rent human, public safety, and physical conditionswithin the neighborhood must be addressed. Thepanel recommends the following actions:

• The TIF district needs to be abandoned orthe study area needs to be excluded from the district.

• The city should improve its promotion, market-ing, and deployment of existing programs andresources that it has at its disposal for all as-

pects of housing rehabilitation and construction,community revitalization, and support for com-munity building.

• The city should use financial incentives to en-courage residential, retail, and commercial de-velopment in the district, since, at least initially,it will be difficult to attract residents to the areawhile redevelopment is taking place.

• The city should take the lead in substantiallyincreasing investment in infrastructure andshould integrate the improvements in roadway,sewer, water, power, fiber optics, and other sys-tems to fully upgrade the area’s utilities.

• The city should improve services such as trashcollection, police presence, code enforcement,and infrastructure repair. It should make tan-gible projects a priority, beginning with thecleanup of bulk items and trash from streets,and continuing with improvements to rights-of-way and the utility infrastructure.

• Public investment in public spaces will improvethe attractiveness of the study area and the qual-ity of life for existing and prospective residents.

• A block-by-block development strategy shouldbe implemented, in which entire blocks are im-proved by rehabilitating existing housing, build-ing new compatible infill housing on vacant lots,and providing assistance to homeowners thatwill enable them to improve their properties.

• Partnering with community development corpo-rations offers the opportunity for resident-led,sustainable housing development in the studyarea. Investment in neighborhood building,leadership development, technical assistance,and training will be necessary for the effectiveutilization of neighborhood resources. Commu-nity development corporations (CDCs) can be-come flexible, nimble, production-oriented enti-ties that are the right-sized developers for thegenerally small, scattered, vacant parcels andstructures needing rehabilitation.

• Public investment in the Carver CommunityCultural Center needs to continue as a line itemin the city’s budget.



• The successful redevelopment of the FriedrichBuilding is critical to the revitalization of thedistrict and needs public support. City under-writing of this project will help to buy down thedevelopment risk and should result in otherleveraged investment in the neighborhood bythe developer.

• Local foundations should be viewed as criticalpartners seeking to invest in cultural, human, orphysical development that can be leveraged be-cause of a concerted and coordinated focus onthe district.

• Nonprofit organizations like the SalvationArmy can become partners with the city in thedevelopment of mutually beneficial programs toaddress the social service needs that plague thedistrict. Physical development cannot be sus-tained without a commensurate investment inand improvement of human development.

Establishing a New Focus and a New IdentityThe district must create a clear, unique identityfor itself. In this regard, the panel recommendsthe following:

• Comprehensive rezoning to create two incen-tive zoning districts, one for commercial devel-opment and one for mixed-use development.

• Creation of a neighborhood identity that relatesto the working history of the community, result-ing in a trail of evidence of successes along theway.

• Establishment of common design themes and el-ements that are consistently applied throughoutthe neighborhood. This should include the cre-ation of a neighborhood iconography to apply toneighborhood markers and icons. This iconogra-phy, or lexicon, needs to reflect the working, vi-brant community and its historical context andcomplexities.

Once an identity is determined, all project andprogram implementation actions can flow from it.

Timeline and PhasingThe panel’s recommended general timeline for re-development is described below. In the short/im-

mediate term, the first phase should begin with theprovision of a clean and safe environment. That isthe necessary first step, which should be followedby creating a committee structure, organizing thestakeholders, and planning and building momen-tum. The next phase should be characterized byan emerging community identity, the completionof smaller projects, and the assurance that largeprojects are in the pipeline. In the longer term—five years and beyond—the district’s identityshould be emerging and the community should bewell on its way to becoming a “place” and a com-munity of choice.

One to Two YearsActions for this period include the following:

• Create an action committee and assign city staffsupport.

• Develop a business plan for the district as awhole:

• Articulate a collective vision, with a focus onframing statements;

• Define an area of influence and visual cuesthat create identity;

• Establish goals for the community and iden-tify contributing components;

• Prepare a budget, plan timing for public im-provements, and follow the city funding cycle;and

• Involve schools, the workforce, faith-basedorganizations, social services, public services,and community representatives in the cre-ation of the plan.

• Organize the work of member agencies andcommunity organizations.

• Develop task-specific implementation prioritiesand create a plan for timing, funding partners,and responsibility.

• Establish reporting criteria and timelines. Setmeeting schedules and locations.

• Ensure line-item funding for the CAC that willenable it to secure programs such as the homerehabilitation program.


• Build membership throughout the community.Organize events to enhance visibility.

• Program funds for public projects such as road-ways in the city budget and in the MetropolitanPlanning Organization Transportation Improve-ment Program.

• Create local assistance programs to repair andrehabilitate structures in the community. Thecriteria for these programs should be clear andconsistent with the action plan objectives. A re-volving loan fund and a matching grant fund ofapproximately $50,000 for small repairs shouldbe established in year one, and the first set ofeight to ten projects should be completed be-tween years one and two.

• Develop newsletters and marketing tools tocommunicate and support successes.

Initial efforts should be focused, visible, and di-rectly benefit the community, both economicallyand socially. As an example, the CAC shouldchampion the development of a facility that pro-vides jobs in the community. This high-priorityproject should be subject to the same design stan-dards and review established for other develop-ment in the community.

Three to Five YearsAfter the first two years, the reporting struc-ture and process for the CAC should be well es-tablished, two to three rounds of small projectsshould have been completed, larger projectsshould be underway, and private investor move-ment should have begun on larger parcels withinthe community. Actions for years three to fiveinclude the following:

• Designation of eligible fiscal agents within thecommunity should be complete, so that largergrant requests can be pursued.

• Grant applications for high-priority projectsshould be well developed.

• Smaller, local assistance programs for emer-gency repairs, rehabilitation of structures, andimprovement of exterior spaces should be wellestablished, with increasing funding through

CDBGs, local community resources, and othersources.

• Action plan progress should be evaluated andthe plan updated as needed. The CAC structureand viability should be reviewed as part of theplanning and project review process, then modi-fied to meet the district’s current needs.

At this point, project successes should be moresignificant and more varied. Newsletters and othercommunication tools should continue to highlightthis progress and feature upcoming projects, in-cluding private investments that enhance thecommunity. Communication tools can be used toemphasize what can be accomplished with collabo-rative partnerships.

Year Five and BeyondBy year five, direction for the ongoing redevelop-ment of the district should be established and thedevelopment efforts should be reaching a balancebetween public and private investment to increaseefforts toward establishing a livable, viable com-munity. At this point, the city must consider tak-ing the following actions:

• The role and operational structure of the CACshould be reevaluated; if truly successful in itsinitial mission, the CAC may be a candidate fortransferring its operations to other organiza-tions and winding down.

• Larger commercial projects that require morecomplex funding should be pursued throughpartnering.

• Public investment in the district should be wellunderway, resulting in clear, identifying accom-plishments, and a new sense of place should beapparent.

• The larger public works projects should be pro-grammed and disruption to commercial areasmitigated.

By this time, the CAC and its member entitiesshould be well established in their roles within thecommunity and the city. Community collaborationshould be resulting in events and activities, in-vestments and developments that are raisingawareness and supporting the value of the district


and the assets it contributes to San Antonio. Plansand activities should continue to be reviewed andevaluated, and emerging priorities addressed. Asthe organization matures, its ability to respond tocommunity needs and to secure the appropriateresources from the city and other sources shouldbecome routine.

It is critical that the community succeed in this ef-fort to ensure the revitalization of the St. PaulGateway District as part of a balanced and equi-table economic development strategy for the re-gion as a whole. The St. Paul Gateway Districtrepresents an important piece of San Antonio’slong and rich cultural heritage and identity.


The panel has organized its analysis and rec-ommendations according to four framingstatements that best articulate the need forredevelopment in the study area. These

framing statements also serve to organize thefindings in each section of this report:





The panel has renamed the East CommerceStreet corridor study area, calling it the St. PaulGateway District. Because the area is plagued bynegative perceptions caused primarily by condi-tions of neglect, panel members agree that a newname will help establish a new image for the area.The St. Paul Gateway District also better de-scribes the redevelopment area, since the panelconsidered various action areas, designated bystrategic land uses, that lie beyond the East Com-merce Street corridor.

The panel strongly endorses the need for signifi-cant public sector investment to begin to create an environment for change in the district. Its pri-mary focus was on two areas: the land betweenIH-37 and the railroad tracks, from south of theAlamodome north to Nolan Street, and the EastCommerce Street corridor between the interstateand Hackberry Street, including the connection todowntown San Antonio. Areas of secondary con-cern include the Dignowity Hill Historic District,the Friedrich Building and the surrounding cul-tural area, and the residential area south of EastCommerce Street between South Cherry andMonumental streets.

The panel recommends improved gateways alongEast Commerce Street just past IH-37 at St. PaulSquare and at the La Garita historic marker at

Monumental Street. While St. Paul Square servesas an anchor at the western entrance to the com-munity, the Friedrich Building, together with thecemetery lands, helps establish an anchor furthereast, thereby defining a concentrated area for re-development along the corridor.

With a new name and a new focus for redevelop-ment of the study area, the panel believes that thearea can move beyond past images and present it-self as a district ripe for change. Sparking redevel-opment will require considerable front-end expen-ditures. Existing zoning does not reflect currentconditions or desirable changes. The panel sug-gests design standards to raise the quality of de-sign and begin to sustain change.

The panel considers the need to shape patterns ofgrowth for this area east of the downtown essen-tial, since land uses from the downtown graduallywill expand into the study area. By transformingitself into a new destination east of the downtown,the St. Paul Gateway District can help encourageextended visitor stays. This would help addressthe concern that while the visitor population islarge, the length of its stays is short.

An organization is needed that will enable neigh-borhood and community groups to come togetherand speak with one voice. To best represent thearea, the panel recommends a community actioncommittee (CAC), a volunteer organization of peo-ple appointed by the city council to bring the com-munity together. The CAC will not be a redevel-opment agency; redevelopment should remainunder the purview of the public sector.

The panel is confident that, by building on its as-sets, the St. Paul Gateway District can evolve intoboth another destination for visitors to San Anto-nio and a cohesive yet diverse urban residentialneighborhood. Improvements in circulation andstreetscape upgrades will help to physically con-nect the area to the downtown. Expansion of the

Conclusion


downtown can extend into this community, andthe panel has designated a transitional develop-ment zone—located between the railroad tracksand the more residential area—between the ex-pansion area and the historic residential neighbor-hoods north of East Commerce Street.

The goal of the panel’s proposed redevelopmentplan is to build upon the area’s historic and cul-tural resources and create a mixed-income resi-

dential community characterized by its arts andentertainment venues as well as its historic char-acteristics. As more people choose to live closer tothe downtown, this area will provide an ideal loca-tion for the development of mixed-price housing,new businesses, and accompanying employmentopportunities within a district known for itsunique identity, the St. Paul Gateway District.


J. Kevin LawlerPanel ChairWest Palm Beach, Florida

Lawler, the managing partner of N-K VenturesLC, has more than 30 years of national experienceas a real estate financial and deal adviser. N-KVentures is principally engaged in the develop-ment of urban infill residential and mixed-use pro-jects in southeast Florida. Founded in 2001, thecompany’s development activities reflect the phi-losophy of its founding principals: the creation ofhigh-value urban places. The firm started two pro-jects in 2001, both of which are nearing comple-tion. In 2003, the company started a multiphaseurban mixed-use project that currently is in theplanning and permitting phase.

Lawler is responsible for initial underwriting of all new development projects, investor and capi-tal relationships, and all transactional aspects ofN-K Ventures’s projects and investments. He alsomanages subcontractor relationships and, to-gether with his partner, Nancy C. Graham, is in-volved in the identification and qualification ofnew business opportunities.

Prior to starting his career in the developmentbusiness, Lawler was a partner in the real estateadvisory services practice of a major financial ser-vices firm’s Washington, D.C., and Miami offices.He had a national practice advising developers,corporations, nonprofit organizations, and publicentities on financing and large-scale developmenttransactions. Lawler’s practice included REIT for-mations, commercial property portfolio structur-ing and recapitalization, corporate real estateventures and leasing, large-scale developmentprojects, public/private development, and financ-ing transactions.

Lawler is a member of the ULI–the Urban LandInstitute’s leadership group. He serves on the In-

stitute’s Policy and Practice Committee and is a member of the Multi-Family Council. He hasserved on numerous Advisory Services panels andULI project analysis teams, and was a vice chairof the Southeast Florida District Council. In Octo-ber 2000, ULI recognized his service with theRobert O’Donnell Award. Lawler also has lec-tured extensively on real estate development andfinancing at the Harvard Business School, theWharton School of the University of Pennsylvania,the McDonough School of Business at GeorgetownUniversity, the George Washington UniversitySchool of Business, the University of Maryland,and the University of Miami School of Law.

Prior to relocating to south Florida, Lawler servedon the economic development committee of theWashington Board of Trade for several years. Heis a graduate of Michigan State University and re-ceived an MCP from the John F. Kennedy Schoolof Government at Harvard University, where healso was a Mellon and Ford Foundation fellow.

Lawler currently serves as the mayor of WestPalm Beach’s representative in securing and nego-tiating a major convention center hotel project.He also is a member of the Mayor’s Economic De-velopment Council and was the keynote speakerat the Greater Fort Worth Builders AssociationAnnual Awards Dinner in 2004.

Robert H. Busler, Jr.Washington, D.C.

Busler is the principal responsible for strategicplanning and business development with WDGArchitecture, PLLC. He has more than 25 yearsof design, project management, business devel-opment, and practice management experience.Busler is responsible for setting WDG’s strategicdirection as well as spearheading business devel-opment initiatives in support of the firm’s strate-gic plan. He develops and directs the implementa-

About the Panel


tion of new market strategies while focusing onWDG’s organizational structure and systems re-finement to enhance process and design quality.

As a practicing architect, Busler is recognized forhis expertise and leadership in the design and con-struction of large facilities for public and privateclients. His accomplishments include the comple-tion of major development/transportation proj-ects, design management of the Washington/Bal-timore bid for the 2012 Olympics, and the newWashington Convention Center, as well as the ini-tial Major League Baseball ballpark location studyfor Washington, D.C., and the renovation of RFKStadium for the new Washington Nationals base-ball team. Other projects under his leadershipinclude major airport terminals, federal agencyheadquarters, corporate headquarters, and urbanand suburban investment office buildings, hotels,and sports facilities. Busler has won numerousarchitectural design awards for projects in theUnited States, Europe, and Southeast Asia.

Prior to joining WDG, Busler spent nine years asvice president and director of architecture in thenational capital region office of HNTB Corpora-tion, and 13 years with Kohn Pedersen Fox Asso-ciates (KPF) of New York City, where he servedas an associate principal and principal-in-charge of the firm’s Southeast Asian office in Sydney,Australia.

Busler received his master’s degree in architec-ture from Columbia University and his bachelorof science in architecture from the University ofVirginia. He was inspired to become an architectwhile growing up next door to Edward Tanner,the chief residential architect for J.C. Nichols andKansas City’s Country Club Plaza district.

David R. DeSimonePittsburgh, Pennsylvania

DeSimone is senior vice president of operationsand general counsel for the Pittsburgh CulturalTrust, where he manages real estate development,capital projects, theater operations, planned giv-ing, and general legal matters. The PittsburghCultural Trust is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit group cre-ated in 1984 to restore the Benedum Center for

the Performing Arts, a 2,700-seat performing artsvenue. The trust currently owns and operates fiveperforming arts venues, three visual arts gal-leries, and several storefront arts projects to sup-port diverse performing and visual arts offeringsas part of the ongoing revitalization of the Pitts-burgh Cultural District, a 14-square-block area indowntown Pittsburgh. The trust also presents awide range of arts offerings.

The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust has collaboratedwith commercial real estate developers, govern-ment leaders and planners, lenders, leaders of per-forming arts groups, and representatives of localphilanthropic foundations to create and support avariety of public/private initiatives, including The-ater Square, a mixed-use development with acabaret theater, restaurant, marketing and ticket-ing center, and 790 parking spaces.

Other trust real estate projects include residentialdevelopment, including a new 151-unit riverfrontbuilding developed as a joint venture with LincolnProperty Company; art galleries; office space forperforming arts companies; a jazz club; acquisitionof strategic properties; and the relocation of theCreative and Performing Arts High School intothe Pittsburgh Cultural District.

Public projects include installations of public artand amenities such as new brick sidewalks andgranite curbs, new streetlights, and new banners;administration of a 51-building national historicdistrict, the Penn-Liberty Historic District; de-velopment of new riverfront parks; and the cre-ation of a historic facade loan program and an ele-vator loan program.

DeSimone currently is coordinating a team to im-plement a long-term strategy recommended by aULI Advisory Services panel for additional resi-dential, commercial, and arts uses in the Pitts-burgh Cultural District. He is a former chair ofULI’s Pittsburgh District Council and a memberof the ULI Inner-City Council. A lifelong residentof western Pennsylvania, DeSimone graduatedfrom Harvard College and the University of Pitts-burgh School of Law.


Lynn Everett-LeeHollywood, Florida

Everett-Lee is the land use and transportationprogram manager for the South Florida RegionalPlanning Council, where she is responsible forguiding development projects with regard to trans-portation and transit improvements, and coordi-nating among area transportation planning and en-gineering agencies and local communities throughthe development review process. She has devel-oped community-based transportation programs,primarily focused on services for seniors and peo-ple with disabilities, throughout the United States,and also has expertise in transportation issues sur-rounding workforce development, seniors who nolonger drive, access to dialysis treatment, and theAmericans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and its im-plications for public transit.

Everett-Lee has worked with a broad range oftransportation providers, both public and private,to develop and improve the efficiency and effec-tiveness of transportation services. She has workedextensively with seniors and people with disabili-ties to develop responsive service that improvestheir quality of life.

Everett-Lee previously served as a senior plannerin market development for the Regional Transpor-tation Authority in Chicago. She acted as liaisonto transportation agencies throughout the regionto determine needs and match solution strategiesto core issues. She also assisted in developing atravel training program framework that has be-come one of the premier programs in the UnitedStates. Everett-Lee served as the ADA compli-ance officer for the Chicago Transit Authority(CTA), working with the community to develop afully compliant transportation program and to im-prove communication between the CTA and stake-holders with disabilities.

Everett-Lee began her career in Memphis, whereshe assisted with planning for the Memphis AreaTransit Authority bus and rail transit systems andcomplementary paratransit service. While in Mem-phis, she served on the board of the Memphis Cen-ter for Independent Living and the Mayor’s Coun-cil for Citizens with Disabilities. Everett-Lee

received a degree in city and regional planningfrom the University of Memphis and an under-graduate degree in finance from the University of Florida.

Philip S. HartLos Angeles, California

Hart, president/CEO of Hart Realty Advisors, adivision of Tanya Hart Communications, Inc., hasmore than 20 years of experience in developingand managing complex real estate developmentprojects. He served as project manager for the5,000-seat West Angeles Cathedral in South LosAngeles, and as master developer for the 75-acreCrossTown Industrial Park in Boston’s Roxburyneighborhood. Hart also has directed major trans-portation studies, in addition to providing masterplanning services for urban industrial parks andplanning studies in association with the UrbanLand Institute for communities such as Holly-wood, California, and Roxbury, Massachusetts.

Other facilities Hart has developed include abiotechnology center in Roxbury’s CrossTown In-dustrial Park that opened in 1989. Boston Univer-sity Medical Center is the anchor tenant, alongwith several commercial biotech firms. The centerhas provided education and training for local resi-dents interested in biotech careers and has madeadvances in the treatment of sickle cell anemiaand congestive heart failure among African Amer-icans. Hart also developed the mixed-use MorganMemorial Goodwill Industries headquarters inCrossTown Industrial Park.

Hart served as project director for the BostonTransportation Planning Review Southwest Cor-ridor Mobility Study, which reconfigured transitand highway options within Boston’s Route 128corridor. He was a faculty member at the Univer-sity of Massachusetts in Boston for more than 20years and served as a professor of sociology anddirector of the William Monroe Trotter Institutefor the Study of Black Culture before taking earlyretirement in June 2002. February 5, 2002, wasdeclared Philip S. Hart Day in the Commonwealthof Massachusetts for his contributions to Massa-chusetts as a public intellectual. Hart earned anundergraduate degree from the University of Col-


orado in Boulder. In 1995, he was inducted into theuniversity’s Distinguished Alumni Gallery. Heearned graduate degrees in sociology from Michi-gan State University.

Hart also is an award-winning author and film-maker with two documentary films in the PBSvideo catalog. He is developing a feature film ti-tled The Hallelujah Flight. He serves on theboard of managers of the Hollywood WilshireYMCA and as vice chair of Ability First’s (for-merly the Crippled Children’s Society of SouthernCalifornia) Housing Governance Board, which hasdeveloped more than 300 residential units for dis-abled persons.

W. Thomas LavashWashington, D.C.

Lavash is a senior associate with Economics Re-search Associates, a national real estate and eco-nomic development consultancy. He brings to pub-lic and private clients 20 years of experience inreal estate and economic development projects.Lavash directs market, financial feasibility, andcost/benefit studies; revitalization strategies fordowntown, waterfront, and commercial districts;repositioning studies for underperforming assets;and property valuations. He has worked in numer-ous primary and secondary markets, and his pub-lic clients include numerous government agenciessuch as the U.S. General Services Administration,the Florida Department of Transportation, andthe Massachusetts Port Authority. Private clientsinclude Hines Development, Icahn Enterprises,Michael Swerdlow Companies, Olympia & York,Prudential Realty, and Terrabrook.

From 1992 to 1994, Lavash completed more than40 valuations of commercial and multifamily prop-erties throughout the northeast corridor with theWashington, D.C., office of Ratcliffe, Cali, Duffy,Hughes & Company, where he advised on acquisi-tion and disposition strategies and property oper-ations. From 1986 to 1991, he completed 65 mar-ket assessments of residential, commercial, andindustrial projects nationwide for Halcyon Ltd.

Lavash is a member of the Urban Land Instituteand the Congress for the New Urbanism, and is

listed in Who’s Who in the East. He also serves onthe technical advisory panel committee of ULI’sWashington, D.C., District Council. Several of hisprojects have received national planning or honorawards from the American Planning Association.Lavash holds a master of city planning degreefrom the University of Pennsylvania with a cer-tificate in real estate development from its Whar-ton School of Business and a bachelor of arts inurban studies, cum laude, from the University ofMassachusetts at Dartmouth.

David S. PlummerCoral Gables, Florida

Plummer founded David Plummer & Associates in 1978. The firm provides a wide variety of engi-neering services with an emphasis on traffic androadway design. His engineering career spansmore than 35 years and includes some of the mostsignificant projects in Florida. Plummer’s publicengineering experience involves local, county, andstate jurisdictions where he pioneered studies ofstreet protection systems to reduce crime andtraffic. He was affiliated with the Criminal Jus-tice Institute in south Florida and promotes closecooperation between law enforcement and traf-fic engineering.

Plummer previously worked at NorthwesternUniversity, the California Department of Trans-portation, and the Illinois Department of Trans-portation. He was a graduate of the training pro-grams of both public organizations. This trainingincluded planning, traffic engineering, design, ma-terial testing, and construction. He has served as amember of the Coral Gables Planning and ZoningBoard, the Dade County Impact Fee Committee,and the Northwest Dade/Southwest BrowardPlanning Committee. He also has been involvedin Florida Supreme Court transportation train-ing, the Criminal Justice Institute, and commit-tees of the Florida Department of CommunityAffairs.

Plummer received a BS in civil engineering fromthe University of Arizona and an MBA from North-western University. He is a registered engineer inthe states of Florida and Illinois, and a member of


the Urban Land Institute and the Institute ofTransportation Engineers.

Harry G. Robinson IIIWashington, D.C.

Robinson is a design professional educated in ar-chitecture, city planning, and urban design. Hiscareer in these disciplines includes practice/con-sultation, teaching, management/leadership, andresearch/publication. Currently, he is professorof urban design and dean emeritus, adviser tothe president and director, Center for Urban De-sign in Transportation, Howard University, andprincipal of TRG Consulting, an international de-sign firm.

From 1979 to 1995, Robinson served as dean andprofessor of urban design at Howard University’sSchool of Architecture and Planning, and subse-quently served as the university’s interim vicepresident of academic affairs and vice presidentfor university administration.

The president of the United States twice ap-pointed Robinson commissioner of the U.S. Com-mission of Fine Arts, which he was elected tochair. He also was elected president of two na-tional architectural organizations: the NationalArchitectural Accrediting Board in 1996, and theNational Council of Architectural RegistrationBoards in 1992. Robinson is author of the award-winning third history of Howard University, TheLong Walk: The Placemaking Legacy of HowardUniversity. He holds professional degrees in ar-chitecture and city planning, a bachelor of archi-tecture degree with design honors, an MCP fromHoward University, and an MCP in urban designfrom the Harvard University Graduate School ofDesign.

Mtamanika YoungbloodAtlanta, Georgia

Youngblood is chair of the board of the HistoricDistrict Development Corporation (HDDC),Atlanta’s leading nonprofit, community-basedbuilder of affordable homes in the central city.HDDC is committed to neighborhood revitaliza-tion based on historic preservation and economicdiversity. Its goal is to reestablish the mixed-income residential community that once thrivedaround Sweet Auburn Avenue and the childhoodhome of Martin Luther King, Jr.

As a community-based developer, HDDC has builtstrong links to neighborhood organizations andhomeowner groups. Through discussion and col-laboration with local residents, Youngblood hashelped develop innovative new strategies for com-munity revitalization by combining mixed-incomehousing and historic preservation. Among thesestrategies are a firm policy of nondisplacement ofexisting neighborhood residents and a block-by-block pattern of development that emphasizesscale and sustainable improvements.

Youngblood also served as a James A. Johnson2000 Community Fellow of the Fannie Mae Foun-dation. She most recently served as the seniorvice president for community impact at UnitedWay of Metropolitan Atlanta. Youngblood earnedan MBA in organizational management fromAtlanta University and was sponsored by theFannie Mae Foundation as a fellow to the John F.Kennedy School of Government Executive Pro-gram at Harvard University.

an advisory services panel report st.paulgateway district ... · st. paul gateway district san...

Documents