[jmike408]

Roger that. If you want to make downtown living enticing in California, you need a downtown mall. One of them Westfield places should do nicely.

I totally disagree. You can make the point that downtown SJ needs more retail, (on that I agree), but it does not need a mall. Don't forget the Pavilion failed years ago. Malls can become deserted… look at Vallco for crying out loud.

We have too many malls, though. Honestly, if I live in Downtown and had no car and can spend half a day at the mall, I can just hop onto lightrail and head south to Oakridge Mall or north to Great Mall.
...
For retail to do well in Downtown, the stores would have to be unique and differentiate itself from the mega malls that San Jose already has.

^^kay:

As I've said before, SJ should concentrate on bringing as many residents and jobs downtown as possible. Retail will naturally follow that, assuming is makes sense. Cultural institutions, civic events, cool restaurants, and nightlife are what should be focused on. Those are the types of things that will get people to come out of the suburbs, not another Urban Outfitters branch.

^^kay:

For downtown to do well (imho), it needs to offer something suburbia and malls don't. Culture, nightlife, events, etc. Why would anybody travel downtown to go to a mall when there are several already exist around town?
What I think downtown could take from the burbs is that little courtyard/plaza area at Santana Row (the one by Maggiano's, The Counter, Starbucks, etc.) and expand on that idea. On warm evenings, that little area is packed with people enjoying the night air and atmosphere. Why wouldn't they? Downtown could use a gathering place like that to allow families and friends a place to commiserate outside in our great weather. San Pedro Square Market is adequate, but it is a bit disjointed with the separate buildings and all. But, it's places like that downtown could use more of, not malls.

 

[aelar]

Why insist on putting it elsewhere than the East side? There isn't one reason as to why it should be in any given location: where land is owned by the city; available jobs; available transportation options to jobs.

Look, if we want these individuals to, ultimately, move upward out of this housing, they need easy access to jobs. That's proximity and/or frequent transit in multiple directions to maximize opportunity coverage. So, while it may be politically convenient to shove them to the edges, doing so may be self-defeating.

Yes. This site looks completely reasonable for this sort of project. The transit isn't -great- only one eh bus line in the immediate area, the 26, but Light Rail to DT is right there at Curtner which is a BIG benefit. The 901 goes to a lot of job sites, government offices, and other services. The Food Bank is right there. There are numerous small restaurants and a little shopping center in walking distance, a source of jobs as well as food and entertainment.

The city is doing a lot of different things to make more housing for the homeless, and this sounds like a project that can be built and getting people off the streets quickly. There's nothing that says this site has to be transitional housing for the homeless forever. When the city has money, it can be turned into mid-rise affordable housing or some other better use. But for now, I do not see the downside beyond some distressed neighbors, and there will be distressed neighbors anywhere these projects get built.

Presumably the City has a reason for this site and not any other land they already own, for this project. If someone knows about a specific property the city already owns that would be better, where is it?

 

[aelar]

What I think downtown could take from the burbs is that little courtyard/plaza area at Santana Row (the one by Maggiano's, The Counter, Starbucks, etc.) and expand on that idea. On warm evenings, that little area is packed with people enjoying the night air and atmosphere. Why wouldn't they? Downtown could use a gathering place like that to allow families and friends a place to commiserate outside in our great weather. San Pedro Square Market is adequate, but it is a bit disjointed with the separate buildings and all. But, it's places like that downtown could use more of, not malls.

I know not a lot of people took advantage of it, scared away by crowds that never materialized, but I really enjoyed Plaza de Caesar Chavez during the Superbowl festivities. Food trucks, live music, hammocks and fire pits and lots of chairs to lounge in. It was family friendly, and very pleasant.

It's too bad this plaza is so segregated from everything else, with the big streets on either side, and the surrounding buildings were for the most part not built with street activation in mind. But some permanent kiosks/clusters of stalls for food and retail and maybe some restroom pods, basically the things that Christmas in the Park brings (a can't miss part of my family and friends' holiday season), but more permanent and not quite as overwhelming of the space, would be a good start to making this a year-round focal point for the area.

 

[jmike408]

I know not a lot of people took advantage of it, scared away by crowds that never materialized, but I really enjoyed Plaza de Caesar Chavez during the Superbowl festivities. Food trucks, live music, hammocks and fire pits and lots of chairs to lounge in. It was family friendly, and very pleasant.

I agree. It would be great if that vibe could be resurrected during the spring and summer months.

 

[Pivot]

That's the first I've heard of it. Any other tidbits about this?

Building is on twitter: @midtownartsmerc
MidtownArts is an interesting concept, zoned for commercial/light industrial, but allowed a small % retail footprint, BSB carved up an old warehouse into "Maker Spaces" that have onsite manufacturing with a small retail footprint. First announced tenants include coffee roaster (@ChromaticCoffee), a brewery (@HapasBrewing), Bikes (@GoodKarmaBikes). Also I believe a furniture maker that makes furniture from reclaimed wood. It seems downtown is losing industrial space for these types of businesses (and getting expensive), so Midtown becomes more appealing.

Lincoln is an interesting connector street between Midtown and Willow Glen (and getting bike lanes to San Carlos) and there is a lot of density coming to this area with the existing, under construction, and planned residential on both sides of San Carlos at Sunol. There hasn't been a lot for residents to do there so far though. It is a short bike ride from my neighborhood between Midtown and the Alameda so I hope the concept catches on and we see more of this type of thing in Midtown and along San Carlos.

 

[TheSauce99]

There is an article on Midtown Arts + Mercantile from last year on Bisnow, with a rendering. Sorry, not allowed to post links yet.

Like Pivot said, there are many progress pics on their Twitter. The article mentioned foot traffic but I stopped by Good Karma Bikes last week for the first time which is already located in that building. It's not really a walkable area since it's so industrial. Hopefully that changes with the housing going up around it, otherwise Good Karma and Terra Amico (even though they are awesome) won't attract foot traffic by themselves.

 

[loldawg]

There is an article on Midtown Arts + Mercantile from last year on Bisnow, with a rendering. Sorry, not allowed to post links yet.

https://www.bisnow.com/silicon-valley/news/commercial-real-estate/barry-swenson-starts-on-stylish-industrial-redo-48361

 

[loldawg]

https://www.bisnow.com/silicon-valley/news/commercial-real-estate/barry-swenson-starts-on-stylish-industrial-redo-48361

Some pics from their twitter feed -

 

[Xynoplas]

If I were the city, I'd destroy these cheap historic buildings that I think has absolutely no value once so ever and just a ploy to make developer so miserable that he would give up on the high rise. Let's face it: the city doesn't want high rises anymore quietly since it thinks the downtown already has way too many high rises anyway. That's the quiet thinking of the city leaders, not really Sam Liccardo- just most everyone else.hno:hno:

I need to oppose you on this. Once you destroy your history, you will never get it back.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/05/middleeast/syria-isis-palmyra-arch-of-triumph/

 

[Xynoplas]

https://www.bisnow.com/silicon-vall...enson-starts-on-stylish-industrial-redo-48361

A heavily industrial part of San Jose is about to get a very stylish repositioning, as BSB has broken ground on its Midtown Arts + Mercantile, which will convert an old warehouse into a creative community gathering space.

Until development decides it needs the space for more condos and apartments! The Hanover Cannery project at East Taylor and 10th Street just kicked out a dozen such "creative community'' members in search of more housing for yuppies. They begin tearing down this historic and very stylish warehouse this summer.

 

[Xynoplas]

I totally disagree. You can make the point that downtown SJ needs more retail, (on that I agree), but it does not need a mall. Don't forget the Pavilion failed years ago. Malls can become deserted… look at Vallco for crying out loud.

Let's go back to my original point. The Pavilion had what? No anchor store! That's the kiss of death in retail marketing. It was a boutique mini-mall and nothing else.

As Silicon Valley becomes denser and more people are enabled to live in DTSJ, that drive to Satan Row will become ridiculous. Satan Row and Valley Fair are already causing traffic jams on 280. You think that's going to clear up?

 

[Saint.Jose(ph)]

I believe that the city wants to allow any interested parties such as the Preservation Action Council of San Jose to have their final say before allowing this project to proceed.

So let me get this straight; They're concerned with a partial demo of Herrold Laboratory Building, which in reality is a single-door store front structure, but had no problems tearing down the Herrold College of Wireless and Engineering building that once stood at the corner of San Fernando & First (below) in order to build the Knight Ridder tower?!?

 

[dirt patch]

After reviewing all of the following documents last night, I've come to the conclusion that this is a situation very similar to that of the Park View Towers project at St. James Park with the historical church building.

http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/48256

http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/48077

I believe that the city wants to allow any interested parties such as the Preservation Action Council of San Jose to have their final say before allowing this project to proceed. If no serious objections are raised, then I believe that the city will give this project the green light.

The only other hangup may be the source of Core Development's financing. I'd like to know if Core is using a major commercial bank or a more flexible source of financing such as from a REIT, a Private Equity fund or an Insurance company real estate fund. That is, big commercial banks tend to be much more restrictive and inflexible in their current lending practices for these types of big projects in the Dodd-Frank Act era.

Right now, financing is fine and not an issue at all. Now, it has to go extensive EIR and more reviews on the historical aspect of project in protecting the old buildings. Just lousy time consuming and will not get the ok until the market cools most likely.hno:

 

[dirt patch]

So let me get this straight; They're concerned with a partial demo of Herrold Laboratory Building, which in reality is a single-door store front structure, but had no problems tearing down the Herrold College of Wireless and Engineering building that once stood at the corner of San Fernando & First (below) in order to build the Knight Ridder tower?!?

Just because of this historic building got demolished, The Gateway Tower may pay for it with its life.:bash:hno:

 

[bobby_guz_man]

So let me get this straight; They're concerned with a partial demo of Herrold Laboratory Building, which in reality is a single-door store front structure, but had no problems tearing down the Herrold College of Wireless and Engineering building that once stood at the corner of San Fernando & First (below) in order to build the Knight Ridder tower?!?

Agree! Wow, what a gorgeous building! Holy hell did our City ****ed up big time back in the days!

But that's in the past now. We'll preserve whatever left is worth preserving, but right now it looks like we're just overcompensating with the bullshit at Gateway Tower! UGH!!!!

 

[DarkEconomist]

I know not a lot of people took advantage of it, scared away by crowds that never materialized, but I really enjoyed Plaza de Caesar Chavez during the Superbowl festivities. Food trucks, live music, hammocks and fire pits and lots of chairs to lounge in. It was family friendly, and very pleasant.

It's too bad this plaza is so segregated from everything else, with the big streets on either side, and the surrounding buildings were for the most part not built with street activation in mind. But some permanent kiosks/clusters of stalls for food and retail and maybe some restroom pods, basically the things that Christmas in the Park brings (a can't miss part of my family and friends' holiday season), but more permanent and not quite as overwhelming of the space, would be a good start to making this a year-round focal point for the area.

Well, if we could FINALLY get the BSB construction going, St. James Park could be that place. Combined with nearby future developments (Silvery, everything following the Julian realignment), that park would only be bolstered when, finally, the VTA allows development of the Mitchell block. Could finally hit the tipping point of number of residents to get spontaneous use of St. James Park.

 

[DarkEconomist]

NT

 

[cardinal2007]

Agree! Wow, what a gorgeous building! Holy hell did our City ****ed up big time back in the days!

But that's in the past now. We'll preserve whatever left is worth preserving, but right now it looks like we're just overcompensating with the bullshit at Gateway Tower! UGH!!!!

That building was around until at least the 70s,

First Street, San Jose CA, 1970s by Alden Jewell, on Flickr

But it really looks neglected at that point. Woolworth is today's Ross.

 

[jbush81]

Let's go back to my original point. The Pavilion had what? No anchor store! That's the kiss of death in retail marketing. It was a boutique mini-mall and nothing else.

I thought i've read in the past that it had a GAP. Maybe that's not anchor enough.

 

[loldawg]

Since there's been some discussion on affordable housing, I thought I'd share this recent piece

I got a chuckle out of this -

The proposal, advanced by Palo Alto’s vice-mayor, travelled far and wide because the numbers seemed preposterous. In much of the country, two hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year qualifies as wealth. The subsidized-housing idea has an eye to public employees—government officials, teachers, firefighters—and would be part of a constellation of housing efforts that the council has launched to build units in Palo Alto’s downtown, near its transit hubs. This has the admirable goal of reducing car emissions but the amusing implication that households earning a mere quarter of a million a year are unlikely to be able to afford a car. Palo Alto’s median family income has been marked at $167,408, the third-highest in the country for a city in its size class. The median property value in town, according to Zillow, is two and a half million dollars and on the rise. The council’s plan to help the area’s struggling six-figure earners is, by a certain logic, sane.