Robert Hammond, the co-founder of Friends of the High Line, the catalyst for development of New York City’s celebrated High Line Park, was invited back to San Antonio, his hometown, earlier this year to speak about the celebrated linear park built on an abandoned elevated railway once slated for demolition in lower Manhattan.
While he was here, Hammond was taken on a tour of San Pedro Creek, which today exists as a concrete ditch, a largely invisible flood-control channel with few remaining signs of a living waterway. He then visited the offices of Muñoz & Co. where his tour guide, Muñoz Principal and Architect Steven Land Tillotson, showed him the preliminary design plans for the $175 million San Pedro Creek Improvements Project.
This first phase of the San Pedro Creek Improvement Project extends two miles, starting at IH-35 at the flood tunnel inlet near Fox Tech High School south to the confluence with the Alazan/Apache Creeks at IH-35 near the former Union Stockyards. Bexar County has dedicated $125 million to the $175 million-project, with the City of San Antonio contributing several million dollars in downtown creekside property, and the San Antonio River Authority managing the project.
“I was very excited as we toured San Pedro Creek,” Hammond said. “My Dad used to take me to the San Pedro Springs. I loved it and it was a very powerful memory. The opportunity is huge to do something different than the River Walk, knitting together the neighborhoods, making it part of a greater loop that connects to the San Antonio River and the Springs. The possibilities are big.”
Then Hammond looked at the design work and had concerns, the principal one being the absence of a noted landscape architectural firm in the project. Instead, Muñoz has hired a landscape architect, Todd Brant, to work on the project full time.
“Not to say that a consultant (architecture firm) can’t be integrated in to the team … but the relationship between architecture, landscape, and engineering is so interwoven (for the San Pedro Creek project), we – the San Antonio River Authority and Bexar County – wanted someone working full time on nothing but this project,” Tillotson said. “Not someone at arms length or out of town.”
HDR Engineering was awarded the primary contract for the flood control project, Tillotson said, while Pape-Dawson Engineers and Muñoz & Co. are subcontractors. The architecture firm, however, controls the design process, and that is at the heart of growing concern among some of the stakeholders.
Some major property owners along San Pedro Creek, others in the design and development community, and some members of the San Pedro Creek Subcommittee, a citizen review group, share Hammond’s concerns. Most are not commenting publicly, but one who has spoken out is developer James Lifshutz. He and his partners own the Soap Works, Soap Works II, and Towne Center apartment complexes along the uptown reach of the San Pedro Creek project near the “Tree of Life” element that Muñoz has illustrated in preliminary design renderings (see top image).
Lifshutz expressed his concerns in a June 16th letter to Suzanne Scott, SARA’s general manager.
“I believe that the 40% design drawings released some months ago were lacking,” Lifshutz stated in an email to the Rivard Report expanding on his comments to Scott. “The design of the northernmost (Lagunillas) reach expresses an inappropriate grandiosity that does nothing to honor the history of San Pedro Creek, nor the generations of San Antonians who have lived and worked on or near its banks.
“This grandiosity distracts from, and cheapens, the history, context, and natural beauty of the Creek – and will not age well. The showiness of the design will make it more difficult to develop land next to the creek. Rather than an amenity that enhances neighboring development, the flamboyance of the creek will be something that has to be overcome.
“A project this important to downtown’s revitalization deserves better, and I strongly urge SARA to engage a landscape architect of regional or national reputation. This having been said, I remain hopeful that the 70% drawings will show an improvement.”
Scott said Wednesday that SARA has been diligent in seeking and considering input from the public and from property owners since the project began, and is committed to striking a balance between the architectural elements of the design and the extensive native plant and tree landscaping that is planned, along with restoration of aquatic life.
“We have heard from people who are concerned about some of the design elements, and we’ve heard from other people who embrace those same elements, so it’s our job and the County’s job to make sure we have a final design that responds to all the comments in the best way possible,” Scott said.
The original design plans have been modified, Scott said, and she anticipates other changes as the project progresses.
Some members of the citizen subcommittee disagreed with Scott’s statement, saying that Henry Muñoz, the CEO of Muñoz & Co., ignored the subcommittee went before Commissioners Court with the firm’s design without giving the subcommittee the opportunity to play a meaningful role.
“We try to explain that this (what the renderings show) is not the final outcome,” Tillotson said. “It will evolve and change over time.”
Planning is now underway for the public art component of the project.
“Architects typically aren’t artists and it’s good when we don’t pretend to be,” Tillotson said. “The public art component really is what transforms this into a ‘culture park.’”
A seven-member art subcommittee has been finalized and will select the artists for installations at 14 different sites along the project. The subcommittee is comprised of representatives from the local art community, the City’s Department for Culture and Creative Development, Bexar County, and design team consultants including a landscape architect. When initial renderings were released, many in the art community were concerned to see sculptures and designs uninformed by local culture or history.
“When we look at the really vibrant illustrations of the features … they’re really just fairly accurate placeholders,” said Jerry Geyer, co-chair of the San Pedro Creek subcommittee.
John Phillip Santos, author and professor at UTSA, has been hired to craft a narration of the creek’s “story,” a history that spans hundreds of years back to the indigenous peoples that first settled near the creek. It’s this narrative that will inform what kind of art goes where.
“History drives the story, the story guides the artist,” Geyer said, adding that there will be a concentrated effort to get local artists involved alongside national or international talent.
“When you’re working on a project where you’re trying to do something more than typical, you’re always getting into territory that can be a little bit design risky,” Tillotson said.
Scott echoed this sentiment.
“The designs on this project are quite a bit different than what people are used to seeing on the Museum Reach or the Mission Reach,” she said. “It’s a bolder design response. The design goals are different. This project will have its own unique characteristics that reflect the community and the culture and history of San Pedro Creek.”
A survey that drew 113 responses following the May 30 open house meeting at St. Henry Catholic Church Hall, showed general approval of the plans, Tillotson said.
“The negative responses are less than 20%,” Tillotson said of the results in June. “That’s a wonderful design check. … I think that 18 or 20% of the people didn’t like Hugman’s design at the time.” Robert H.H. Hugman designed the River Walk built in the 1930s.
“We’re designing this for people, not for critics,” he said.
What would Hammond do differently?
‘”The model for San Pedro Creek should be the Mission Reach, which means restoration of the natural environment, not heavy architectural intervention,” he said. “The bones are there, but it needs a much lighter touch. It really needs more landscape and less architecture.”
Hammond’s concerns might be written off by some as elitist, coming from a transplanted New Yorker with unrealistic expectations. After all, Friends of the High Line raised tens of millions of dollars in private funds to match public investment in that world-class park. The High Line attracts millions of visitors and locals a year and has generated billions of dollars in economic development along its 1.45-mile length.
Yet the two projects are not that different in scope. Phases One and Two of the High Line cost $152 million, and the third phase is budgeted at $75 million. One big difference between the two projects: No philanthropic or private sector funds have been raised to complement the public money being spent on San Pedro Creek, although significant development projects are planned along its banks, including the new Frost Bank Tower by Weston Urban.
The question now is whether public officials will respond to private sector concerns about some of the design features and, in particular, the absence of a landscape architecture firm in the planning. The design team will make its so-called “70% design completion” presentation to the San Pedro Creek Subcommittee on Friday, at 8:30 a.m. at SARA headquarters at 100 E. Guenther St., and again at a Bexar County Commissioners Court working session on Tuesday, 1:30 p.m. on the second floor of the Bexar County Courthouse.
Tillotson said not to expect updated renderings out of the meeting on Friday. Those will likely be developed and revealed closer to the 90% design completion mark.
“At this point in the process we’re really focusing on the technical aspects … how things go together, getting an accurate cost for the (engineering work),” he said.
The project timeline approved by the Commissioners Court last year calls for 70% completion of the design work this month. The 40% design that Lifshutz referenced in his letter was presented in April. The deadline for 90% completion of the design work is January 2016 and the 100% deadline is in March 2016. A two-year construction timeline calls for Phase One of the project to be completed in time for the city’s 300th anniversary celebrations in May 2018.
Supporters of the Muñoz design praise the Tree of Life Plaza, the Salinas Street Bridge and the Alameda Amphitheater and other exuberantly colorful elements as reflections of Hispanic culture. Critics want a quieter, more natural environment and say the major design elements remind them of the River Walk in the holiday season, seemingly designed to attract visitors rather than locals.
Interestingly, the exuberant use of color by noted Mexican Architect Ricardo Legorreta in designing San Antonio’s Central Library in the early 1990s set off its own wave of protest and debate over the use of his “enchilada red” exterior.
“Getting public art right is really, really hard: You have to spend a lot of money and get lucky, That’s why we only do temporary art on the High Line,” Hammond said. “You don’t want people to say the neglected part of town is getting the cheap version of the River Walk. Build an authentic design and people will populate it. You don’t need gimmicks to attract them.
“On the High Line project, the landscape architect was in the lead role,” Hammond said.
Hammond drew another comparison to the High Line Park and San Pedro Creek.
“The High Line is roughly 27 feet wide, and the creek and it’s space is actually very small, too, and that’s okay,” Hammond said. “You don’t need big spaces to make things work. You need to make connections to the past.
“People got excited about the High Line when we showed them a map and a mile and half of connections to the neighborhoods, and you can do the same with San Pedro Creek, see it as a line on the map that connects people and places and neighborhoods,” Hammond said. “You don’t always need something like the Tree of Life to attract people. People don’t go to the High Line because of the architectural experience, they go there because it gives people a new way of seeing and experiencing the city.”
Hammond said property owners who will benefit directly from the public project should consider funding a notable landscape architect to partner with the architect, and use their own funds to help enhance the final design.
“Most of the time the government is the client, and it’s really hard to get the government to take risks,” he said. “That’s why it’s so important to have that third-party, a private group, but usually you get that place at the table by raising money. That gives you a say. People had to listen to Friends of the High Line because we raised half he funds to pay for it. In this case, the principal players in San Antonio need to take on that third-party role.”
Hammond will be in San Antonio next week for Tech Bloc’s Summer Rally. The technology industry advocacy group has invited him to come speak on several public projects including San Pedro Creek, Hemisfair, the Mission Reach of the San Antonio River, and more. Click here for details about the Aug. 11 event at the Pearl Stable.
*Featured/top image: Preliminary design rendering for a “Tree of Life” element of the San Pedro Creek Improvements Project.
Related Stories:
Survey: Public Supports San Pedro Creek Improvements
Art Curation Taking Shape for San Pedro Creek
#SATXnext Explores San Pedro Creek
Where does this $175 million come from? Wonder if these beautification engineers really see beauty or dollar signs?
Let’s not forget the absolute creep who owns the design firm–notorious for wasting money and an all around scumbag… Wonder how he got the contract…… 😉 http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Henry-Mu-oz-s-successes-come-at-the-cost-of-972635.php
yikes. no.
I like it.
everyone knows what is initially designed never actually gets built – lets hope it doesn’t just become a sidewalk next to creek though-make it exciting but not garish; also Tree of life = Jeff Koons meets Tron http://blog.boombotix.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/jeff-koons-art-teacher.jpg
WTF?
Take away all the flash and give it a more natural look (trees, shrubs, grass) Perhaps a stone walkway. Build it so that fish, birds, etc., can flourish. The Creek cries for its life and freedom back.
Visitors bring more money- it’s smart to attract them. I just hope they have a splash pad so children can play- locals and visitors alike.
How the hell did fpc architects not get this contract w county???? 3 riverwalks in USA and design consulting for Chinese city riverwalk on resume.
Locals will use it folks. Settle down
Are those pillars metallic? They do know this is Texas, right? The sun will reflect off those things and blind someone.
Please get Robert Hammond involved before we let this project turn into the circus it appears to be. Get serious. I like Steve Tillotson very much and have known him for years. That photo looks like a stage set for a dance number for the Academy Awards in the 80’s. Please, please hire Robert Hammond to redirect this project. Did anyone ever bother to ask how many projects of this nature Munoz had done? Well no. Just like the SAISD Bond Issue where they’d never done that either. Sorry guys. Someone needs to point these things out. This gimmicky overly wrought Hollywood treatment of our creek is so off base. I find it hard to believe SARA is defending it at all.
what IS all that stuff? weird…
How about a spot where we can get in and splash around?
Gaudy.
Tacky, tacky, tacky.
Thanks for this article. I take Robert Hammond’s input very seriously, and I take the prospect of reviving the integrity of San Pedro creek very seriously. I attended one of the public reviews and I even recorded my comments on videotape at the meeting. So, this is a repeat of that commentary. What I see as a lost opportunity is the Educational content of San Pedro Creek. The first part of the project is near Fox Tech and several other private schools, and it would be a wonderful outdoor classroom site, if we take that use into consideration in the design at this stage. We yearn for inner city education to motivate our inner city students and families, and here is a well located opportunity to do history, geography, science and engineering, as well as appreciate the art installed there. I am heartened to see that John Philip Santos will author the narration.
Not exactly what the World Heritage Site visitors expect to see?
As long as I can cycle and run on the path, the rest will fall into place… Cool lighting, less water, perhaps a living wall
Calm the scene down! It’s a beautiful place which should only need soft enhancement…
Yuk
It looks like a theme park without a theme.
Cirque du Soleil anyone? No thanks, this looks crazy…. Trying to hard, make it natural…
Looks like a casino. Please do not write critics off. What Hammond is suggesting, to tone down architecture and boost landscape, is not elitist. It is smart. The Museum Reach is a perfect model. Bring more of this to areas of town, and less bright gimmick themes. My sister drives weekly to the Pearl to walk around from 10 miles northeast. The landscape is fantastic. Same for the King William area of the river. It doesn’t take much. Give our city another great place to leisure.
San Antonio is a city rife with natural waterways. We have done our local ecosystem a grave, sad injustice by turning these waterways into tourist traps and drainage ditches. Forget what humans want – we desperately need to restore our natural waterways. We should be providing rushes and shelter for animals and birds, stocking it with native fish. The recent work on non-downtown stretches of the SA river is a wonderful example.
We need to repair our ecology, not further exploit it. These “art” installations or whatever we should call the hideous things shown, are not where we should be headed with this.
That is disgusting
NOT like! Shade and pleasant strolling needed with some neighborhood restaurant / store along the way….lots of shade and a peaceful setting.with some public art along the way (small and large)……I get this design take, and its not well executed at all nor appropriate.
I cannot tell you how GLAD I am for this article!!!! I have been having embarrassingly severe anxiety every time these designs get brought up to the point that my friends don’t talk about the creek around me to avoid hearing another monologue… This Munoz company should not be allowed to design a coffee mug, let alone the creek, with this horrific show of their “talent”. Does any one else think these look like they were designed by Lisa Frank circa 1992?
Agreed with the above–HIRE HAMMOND. He has proven he knows what is successful, sustainable, and timeless. When you’re Downtown, locals seek greenspace to provide an oasis from the concrete jungle, not more concrete and lights… Just hoping someone with big bucks steps up and offers funding if Munoz gets the axe.
Whoa! The purple and green water feature reminds me of Barney the Dinosaur! Seriously, this is tacky, trashy, and too Kardashy!
Why not develop San Pedro Creek similar to the museum and mission reach sections of the SA river with lush native plantings and natural surfaces?
Same old, same old, ticky tacky nonsense. I can’t believe the City would pay for this.
It looks so…purple.
I’ve looked at these renderings on more than one occasion and can’t understand how anyone thinks that this fits into the landscape of San Antonio. It’s so cheesy, amateurish and distracting.
Funny that this project is getting heat from the very people who have let their own buildings go into serious disrepair. The final product may look nothing like the renderings we see now, but at least we’ve got backers with the deep pockets to do this right the first time. More than I can say for those who jump over dollar bills to get at nickles.
This is tacky and completely offensive as is the hideous soulless brutalist Planet-of-the-Apes inspired affront to nature and humanity planned for Confluence Park. San Antonio needs something timeless that compliments the waterways not this mess.
Too much like a light and sound spectacle — like they used to have at Teotihuacan. Se parecio a Disneylandia. Not historically enriching to the rich history of this place.
Robert, don’t get involved with Henry Munoz. He’s a despicable blow hard with zero architectural training. If you can redirect the project with your incredible vision and experience, please do ASAP. There, I said it. The Countess Munoz needs to stay in Washington DC aka, Hollywood for the Ugly.
Why not take aspects of the indigenous natives that once inhabited these lands and Mexican culture to design this park? Make it a habitat for native species and even a green trail for pollinators.
Yes, yes, yes! The inclusion and remembrance of the indigenous people must always be included in the design of our public spaces. It seems that it is intentionally forgotten as if the existence of people in our region began with European immigrants.
Agree a more natural approach is key.
Ugh! Too garish.
Horrible-it’s historic & beautiful-don’t tart it up!
Munoz is a plague to be avoided
Interesting commentary so far. Lots to be optimistic about. That being said, if Robert Hammond, James Lifschtz and others are concerned, we should take another look. The “Lagunillas” area could be greatly enhanced with landscaping/shade. The so called “Tree of Life” ironically has not trees. This area deserves a second look with much more consideration to the adjacent LISA/San Francesco Di Paola/Soap Works neighbors.
There’s been significant effort in getting this project to this point so it should go without saying that those trusted with it’s development should proceed with great care and observance of the process. Jerry and Michael and the rest of the committee have all worked too hard to do otherwise.
It’s garish. Hammond is right.
‘”The model for San Pedro Creek should be the Mission Reach, which means restoration of the natural environment, not heavy architectural intervention,” he said. “The bones are there, but it needs a much lighter touch. It really needs more landscape and less architecture.”
Nix the purple and pink. Otherwise it looks OK.
Looks cheap and gaudy- hope they re-think this. How about sticking to colors and materials found in nature?
I think the people who read the Rivard Report actually use these spaces, and the city should listen to them.
Why would anyone cover up the water on a waterway? It looks like someone’s idea of a joke, or a plan to put a concept out there that’s so bad it will get people talking and coming up with real ideas.
I really enjoy these sculptural bright things when I see them, but I only want to see them once or twice…. a park, a creek needs to be a place where you want to go again and again. It needs to have the focal point being the water itself and it must open up to and connect to the spaces adjacent to the creek. If we are going to spend $175,000,000 then we must have a great landscape architect to lead the project. We want something timeless…. it does not have to be conservative. It can be innovation and have some drama…. it must be natural and it has to be something folks can enjoy a hundred years from now. It has to be about the light, the water, and the plants as well as the connection to the city around it. It should be a destination for its beauty and tranquility not its tired 1980s drama.
all I know is the person who they are hiring to design this must be wasteful with their own pocket…. I am all about ART but your distracting San Antonio from its natural beautiy…JESUS take the wheel….lmao
I’m all for public art. However, I am even more for nature’s beauty. I think a good landscape architect is essential to this project. San Antonio families need a beautiful and shady place to relax and play. The art should be secondary and nature primary in this case. I would be for spending money to make it look like a natural linear park. Get Hammond back for more advice!
How much do they want to charge to tart up the joint?
Happy that Alazan Creek is at least mentioned once in the article, noting its confluence with Apache Creek and San Pedro Creek to the south – future site of the long-planned Confluence Park not mentioned above (See: https://therivardreport.com/confluence-park-to-receive-major-gift-from-mystery-donor/).
But San Pedro Creek trail as a new or important ‘neighborhood’ (re)connector? That won’t happen unless the planned San Pedro Creek trail / pedestrian infrastructure is extended north a few hundred feet to Eduardo Garcia Park (also not mentioned above) – site of the historic Ximenes Chapel (the ‘Chapel of Miracles’ built in the 1860s and on the National Register) and further up the creek through Five Points and across the VIA parking lot to San Pedro Park, also a national historic site.
Approximately only one more mile of creek trail / pedestrian infrastructure is all that is needed to re-connect the national heritage Ximenes Chapel and San Pedro Park with downtown, as well as surrounding neighborhoods currently severed from safe walking or biking to downtown by highway construction and poor planning.
It is in this presently unplanned additional mile of San Pedro Creek trail and restoration work north (depaving part of the VIA parking lot, etc.) that the bulk of the $175m public funds for San Pedro Creek restoration and connectivity should be spent.
Compare current plans for only 1.45 miles of San Pedro Creek trail – basically a cul-de-sac trail parallel to existing and underutilized north-south streets including Cameron St and large surface parking lots – with the $271m in public funds spent on 8 miles of Mission Reach trail work, and the public benefits and connectivity offered by the Mission trail stretch (see: http://www.sanantonioriver.org/mission_reach/mission_reach.php).
The $175m estimate is roughly $120m more than what was envisioned for the San Pedro Creek expanse of the greater Westside Creeks Restoration Project and connected trails network planned in 2011, which includes a currently unfunded and unscheduled trail from the Confluence Park site to Woodlawn Lake Park just three miles north (via Mario Farias Park and West End Park) along Alazan Creek (see http://www.westsidecreeks.com/westside-creeks-restoration-project-conceptual-plan/)
Three miles of Alazan Creek trail, if ever funded and built as approved in 2011 and endorsed by county voters, will serve and (re)connect at least six existing public schools, two senior centers, surrounding neighborhoods and downtown with parks, pools and the City’s key national and world heritage sites. It will also help to address a huge deficit in pedestrian infrastructure (limited to no sidewalk connectivity or safe walking access to parks, schools, etc.) throughout currently densely populated sections of the old city.
If we spend so unevenly and greatly on San Pedro Creek and fast-track this project (at the expense of long-planned connected trail, flood mitigation and site work along Alazan Creek and Martinez Creek to Apache Creek), we should at least expect that the San Pedro Creek trail be planned and built to re-connect national heritage sites and historic and established neighborhoods along San Pedro Creek with downtown by going just one more mile north.
Let’s see what comes out of the Commissioners Court meeting today, and the Tech Bloc Rally this evening. Please remember that the 70% design point has a lot to do with the infrastructure, time, cost, historical review, environmental impact and reporting targets…and the illustrations we have continued to see are not necessarily representative of what specific features and amenities will look like as the design team gets farther into the design. It will help also to see how much of the linear park way is covered with vegetation, how many trees will be planted, exactly where the history/public art will be situated, and so forth. So…lets see what happens!
Great broad vision of the creek system in the urban core. We would be doing ourselves and future generations we’ll be returning these waterways back into a user friendly natural environment.
175 million flood control dollars being used to beautify a creek while we have hundreds of flood prone areas throughout Bexar county..
Whoever is stealing the money shouldn’t be allowed to build anything this guady. When the next big flood comes, who is responsible for rebuilding this homeless retreat, and who is going to pay for it.? Who is checking the books for cost versus profit?