sign in sign up
<<
Home , Urban renewal

Sustainable and Urban Development 277

Reducing and Revitalizing Historie San Antonio

2 Jennifer Flores 1, Sedef Doganer I Student at Univer,'dty of Texas al San Antonio, USA, 2Department of Architecture, University ofTexas al San Antonio, USA

Abstract Sprawl is a type of urban growth development that has quickly become a disturbing phenomenon within San Antonio, Texas as weIl as multiple US . The "American Dream" of owning a home was made possible after the Second W orld War by the federal government offering mortgage loans to families. The rapid growth of highways and neighborhood subdivisions made the dream a reality, however, developers never planned for the future. Jobs stayed downtown while suburban "eommunities" moved to the outskirts. San Antonio is a prime example of urban sprawl with a growing population moving further outward and leaving the downtown under-utilized despite having one of the most unique eenters in Texas. As ethnographie research will further explain the theory of urban sprawl, the foeus ean then be on the history of the River Walk. The San Antonio River Walk, a pedestrian-friendly, beautified portion ofthe San Antonio River, is loeated in the heart of downtown that seems to attraet mostly tourists. The objeetive is to research future plans for the River Walk as well as propose new and sustainable alternatives to reduee urban sprawl in San Antonio. By building higher density mixed-ineome and mixed-use neighbourhoods and promoting mass transit may aHraet more people to live downtown where all ean appreciate the River Walk. The eity of San Antonio has ereated a River North Master Plan that envisions four neighborhoods with planned residential dwelling units. A case study of the revival of Washington D.C.'5 downtown area as weil as Portland, Oregon's will show teehniques and trends used for renewal. The research will answer the question: how ean loeals get baek to the River Walk by means ofrevitalization?

Keywords: urban sprawl. neighborhood revitalization. San Antonio, , sustainable urban developmenl 278 Jennifer Flores & Sedef Doganer

1 Introduction

The boom after the Second World War left many city centers underutilized. The same can be said of San Antonio, Texas. What began as a presidio (fort) situated around the San Antonio River and subsequent acequias (ditches) in the early eighteenth century, turned out to be the biggest city in Texas at the turn of the twentieth century. The core quickly became dominated by businesses, and known as the central business (CBD) and traditional neighborhoods grew in the surrounding areas. However, six floods within nine years in the early 1920s created fear among residents and business owners. Despite fears, San Antonio grew immensely in the late 1920s, incJuding the first plans for a "River Walk." The decades following the , however, the city saw slow growth. lt was not until the mid-twentieth century that San Antonio began to grow again, especially as a tourist city. Word about the River Walk (wh ich broke ground in 1941) had spread and tourists were flocking to see this unique attraction that offered retail and restaurants. In the 1970s, the CBD lost several businesses but when the River Center Mall was built in 1988 more tourist activity was brought to the area. Meanwhile, residents of San Antonio began to move away trom downtown in the typical form of "suburban sprawl" as weil as the lack of housing units. The intent of this thesis will be to research sustainable ways to reduce suburban sprawl and return residents to historie downtown San Antonio. First, ethnographie research will describe the characteristics as weil as the history of sprawl. Before revitalization can be considered, a full understanding of sprawl and its cost will be discussed in Chapter 2. The boundaries and history of downtown San Antonio will be deseribed in Chapter 3. Finally in Chapter 4, two ease studies of revitalized eities (Portland, Oregon and Washington, D.C.) will be undertaken to recognize current alternatives to sprawL With the above research, proposed and alternative solutions for revitalization in downtown San Antonlo will be discussed.

2 Theory ofUrban Sprawl

2.1 Definitions and Origins

Sprawl is a type of urban growth development oecurring mostly for the past half century in North America with multiple definitions and eharacterizations. It typically occurs outside or on the edge of a eity's limits and setdes on rural . Based on the literature, the following characteristies are agreed upon by the authors: unlimited, scattered, and outward growth into undeveloped area, low density, and leapfrog development without public (BurchelI, Downs, MeCann, Mukherji, 2005, p. 12). Gillham (2002) describes low-density as only slightly more dense than rural single-family building types. Leapfrog development refers to communities "Ieapfrogging" over existing communities and thus "Janding" in an isolated area and perpetually further outward. Duany, Plater-Zyberk, and Speek (2000) go on to explain the definition by breaking it Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 279 into five components: housing subdivisions, shopping centers, office , civic institutions and roadways (p. 5-7). How and why did this type of growth start? According to Bruegmann (2005), early sprawl can be dated to ancient Rome. "Outside the walls ofRome was what citizens called 'suburbium,' meaning what was literally below or outside the walls" (p. 23). In that day, suburbanites were either too poor to afford inner-city Iiving or rieh enough to own a villa in the country. When the industrial revolution came about in the nineteenth century, people in cities around the world were looking to move away from factories. However, it was the transportation boom that can explain modem day . First the railroad then streetcars, made it possible to travel easier to jobs in the city as opposed to by carriage. With the mass production of the automobile in the early twentieth century outgrowth became inevitable. In 1927, the town of Radbum, New Jersey subdivided a new neighborhood from other neighborhoods entitJing it the "town for the motor age" (Gillham, 2009, p. 29). In the new , roads were planned according to traffic, ended in cul-de-sacs and separated from pedestrian flow. The automobile trend continued to grow popular and soon roads were being created at a tremendous rate, including a 41,000-mile interstate program (Duany et aJ. , 2000, p. 8). Simultaneously, the federal govemment was creating policies such as the National Housing Act of 1934 and the Federal Housing Administration, to promote the sale of hornes and thus stimulate the economy following the Great Depression and did so by offering long-term loans for single-family housing (Gillham, 2002, p. 37). "The American Dream became the autonomous homestead in the countryside ... this vision has been equated with a democratic economy, in which homeownership equals participation" (Duany et al., 2000, p. 40). Families continued the American Dream when veterans retuming horne from the Second World War were offered horne loans from the Veteran's Administration (Duany et al., 2000, p. 7). Almost immediately it became prudent to the govemment to carefully separate dangerous industrial areas from residential and also bring at least some commercial elose to the people. successfully divided land uses so that similar building types could exist near each other yet not together. However, at what cost does sprawl come?

2.2 Negative Connotations

First, suburban sprawl undoubtedly ignores history by promoting new construction and growth away from the city center. Owning a brand new single­ family horne in a subdivision away from the noisy downtown area became a very popular false utopia because although it was new. predictable, and clean it was neither thoroughly planned nor sustainable. Most authors agree that sprawl is self-destructive, one saying: "As the middle class rushes to build its countryside cottages at the same time on the same land, the result is inevitably unsatisfying, its objective is self-contradictory: isolation en masse" (Duany et aJ., 2000, p. 40). The psychological effects of sprawl continue to be negative with the loss of "place". Though true that a person can belong to a subdivision, there is no social, cultural, or aesthetically "value". The second most conceming issue 280 Jennifer Flores & Sedef '-''-''''0.11'-'1 about sprawl is the loss of undeveloped rural land or open landscape. "The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) says that the is losing about 365 acres of open land to sprawl development each hour [or] nearly 46 acres of prime farmland every hour" (Gillham. 2002, p. 75). With the loss of land comes the displacement of animal habitat. The NDRC along with the "National Wildlife Federation report that sprawl is contributing to the endangennent of the Pacific Salmon and the Florida Panther (Gillham, 2002, p. 75). Finally, the biggest cost of sprawl is its unsustainability in regards to energy consumption. "The U.S. Department of Energy forecasts that transportation energy consumption will increase by 40 percent by 2020, with almost two-thirds of the oil needed to satisfy that demand coming from outside the United States" (Gillham, 2002, p. 76). Furthermore, the health and environmental world are also suffering due to pollution from the automobile and its overuse in everywhere.

3 Growth in San Antonio

3.1 History ofthe River Walk

On March 29, 1939, a combination of commercial and development based on Robert H.H. Hugman's plan and with funding from the Works Project Administration (WPA) started (Fisher, 1997, p. 65). When the WPA gave the project to the City of San Antonio two years later, it was 2 I-blocks (8,500 feet) of pedestrian friendly, beautified riverbank (Fisher, 1997, p. 70). Slowly retail and restaurants started to open and offer services to the public. "Post-war years proved to be the incubation period for River Walk's phenomenal future success" (Fisher, 1997, p. 75). Fischer also claims that in 1979 the River Walk's success "attracted permanent residents who, in turn, helped revive thc city's core" in regards to two buildings being renovated to bccome condominiums (Fisher, 1997, p. 98). The River Walk was initially designed to make downtown San Antonio a focal point for the city. lt was intended to draw crowds, but instead eventually turned them away. Over the years, the River Walk was losing its lustre as the city was expanding. Downtown San Antonio's River Walk went from being a hub of activity, to something citizens pass on their way horne. The River Walk area continued trying to reinvent itself with various expansions, renovations, and restorations but it was no match for urban sprawl.

3.2 Sprawl in San Antonio

At the turn of the twentieth century, San Antonio was the largest city in Texas and remained so until the 19305 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). As the city grew, the downtown area soon became known as the "Central Business District". The Bureau of the Census can best depict this district as Census Traet 110 I. It is bordered by Elmira Street to the northwest, Brooklyn Avenue to the northeast, Interstate Highway 37 to the East, Durango Boulevard to the South, and Interstate Highway 10 to the West (Figure I). Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 281

Figure 1: Census Tract 1101 (Not to Scale) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002. Retrieved from http://factfinder.census.gov)

It was during the 1920s that the CBD saw the most growth (MitcheII, 1976, p. 5). However in 1921 the San Antonio River had its greatest flood, which caused over 50 deaths and a disaster area downtown. Once recovered from the flood, the CBD continued to prosper until the Great Depression hit and new buildings came to an abrupt halt. The 1940s and 1950s saw littIe growth but it was in the 1960s when businesses began to flourish again due to the popularity of the River Walk. Business boomed again when the River Walk Mall (also known as the Rivercenter) was built in 1988. lt brought high-end fetail, restaurants, a theater, and a Marriott Hotel to the CBD. With a somewhat steady growth of business throughout the twentieth century, housing units, however, in the CBD and the surrounding area has continued on a steady decJine in the last fifty years (only slightly rising at a rate of 18 percent in the 1990s) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2003). In the 1960s, "each of the thirty-eight census tracts in the three­ mile radius of the Central Business District lost population" with the worse case being in Census Tract 1 J0 1 which lost nearly three-fourths of its housing units between 1960 and 1970 (Mitchell, 1976, p. 12). Clearly people do not want to live downtown and are opting for the suburbs at a fast rate (Figure 2). What can be done to get the residents of San Antonio back to downtown? In planning for future growth 01' the city as weH as studying the revitalization efforts of other cities in the following chapter, it will be possible to assess the housing possibilities f'or downtown San Antonio. 282 Jennifer Flores & Sedef -

Tenth Year

Figure 2 : City of San Antonio Growth by Annexations Every Tenth Year (City of San Antonio Planning Dept., 2007, retrieved from http://www.sanantonio.gov/planninglpdf/GIS/map_ download/0712GGO 1.pdf) Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 283

4 Revitalizing Historie Downtown San Antonio

The cases researched to develop this thesis were chosen based on revitalization techniques that have already been put into practice in other cities. Washington D.C. suffered greatly from urban sprawl in the 1940s and 1950s and underwent a large inner-city renewal in the 1980s and again in the late 1990s. In the case of Portland, Oregon, this city is said to have grown "smartly" by being the first city in the nation to implement an "Urban Growth Boundary." This boundary helps to reduce urban sprawl and force a higher in the core of the city.

4.1 Case Studies

4.1.1 Washington D.C.lnner-City Residential Revitalization Like most cities in the United States, the pace of suburbanization quick increased after soldiers returned horne from the Second World War. The Veteran's Administration as weil as the Federal Housing Administration were aiding in providing horne loans for families but American families were searching for something new. "In central cities, particularly the larger cities, out-migration of middle-class white families was due in part to their desire to escape conditions that they deemed negative and to seeure those that they feit were desirable" (Gale, 1987, p. 4). As central cities lost white population to the suburbs thus became "disproportionately" poverty ridden and minority based. Like San Antonio, Washington D.C. saw a great deal of deterioration in its core (especially in the 1950s) in the cornmercial and residential sectors. Revitalization was the only answer and it started with commercial buildings. As commercial buildings began to the "old" downtown, the issue of zoning arose. "Zoning is conservative by nature, short-term in its perspective of the future, and based largely on existing land-use patterns" (Gale, 1987, p. 45). Following the revitalization 01' retail and office buildings in Washington D.C.'s CBD, it was time for aregeneration of the inner neighborhoods. lmmediately there was speculation from the business class regarding the feasibility and profitability of a neighborhood regeneration. The federal government provided funding for a "federal urban renewal project" in the area (Gale, 1987, p. 53). Georgetown followed by Capitol Hill were the first two neighborhoods to undergo revitalization. Historie buildings were designated and restored, and new developments were smartly planned to mix with the existing context. "As middle- and working-c1ass families left such areas in Washington to relocate in the suburbs, the single-family dwellings left behind were often subdivided into or rooms, increasing neighborhood dwelling-unit densities" (Gale, 1987, p. 76). Although Washington D.C. regenerated its downtown throughout the 1970s, it went through another in the late 1990s and through to the 21 SI century. In the winter of 1997, the $200 million dollar MCI Center (a multipurpose sports and entertainment arena) opened simultaneous to the beginning of the business improvement district (BID) both in the heart of downtown. The planning and location of each of these were solely based on the metro lines and proved to be successful when a study found "70 percent of fans 284 Jennifer Flores & SedefDoganer in the first weeks ofthe MC] Center arrived by Metro" (Howland, 1998, p. 320). The new BID "encompasses an area that contains 67 million square feet of office space...There are 6,500 hotel rooms, and a slowly growing residential sector" (Howland, 1998, p. 320). 4.1.2 Portland, Oregon's Urban Growth Boundary In 1972, the Govemor of Oregon began to see the costs of sprawl and its long­ term effects on the country and the state. "He decried 'unfettered despoiling of the land,' said the state's quality of life was at stake, denounced 'coastal condomania, and the ravenous rampage of suburbia in the Willamette Valley,' and said the state had to be protected from 'grasping wastrels of the land'" (Breen & Rigby, 2004, p. 192). That same year the Govemor campaigned for new land-use policy legislature and the people agreed. The new law made "every city and county to develop a long-range plan that met state requirements, which were to incIude establishing urban growth boundaries. addressing how urban land was to be wisely used, and protecting natural resources" (Breen & Rigby, 2004, p. 192). In 1978, the population of Portland agreed upon an agency, Metropolitan Service District (Metro), to outline the physical boundary and begin for the future. The area is "364 square miles in size and includes 24 independent cities plus urban portions of three counties" (Breen & Rigby, 2004, p. 191). The enormous size of the Urban Growth Boundary hardly makes it feel bounding. The city of San Antonio is already larger than the Urban Growth Boundary and it has no boundary. The basic role it intends to play is "intensifying residential development in the city and in outlying communities targeted for expanded housing" (Breen & Rigby, 2004, p. 191). The Urban Grown Boundary has some obvious success stories like that of the city of Gresham, Oregon which saw a 96 percent increase in population over forty years after being doomed by shopping centers of typical suburbia (Breen & Rigby, 2004, p. 193). Several studies have been carried out to discuss the effects of the UGB and if the density within the boundary has proven urban. A planned report for the future released in June 1994 and entitled Region 2040: Decision for Tomorrow, Concepts for Growth "included questionnaires retumed by 17,000 people and gave three options for projected growth: growing out by expanding the boundary, growing up by adding to density, or putting growth into neighboring cities" (Breen & Rigby, 2004, p. 192). Abbott discusses the results: "Tbe feedback strongly favored higher densities, smaller lots, and transit­ oriented development, all of which were incorporated in the 2040 Plan. The document matches the national professional belief in compact cities by proposing to focus new jobs and housing on downtown Portland, urban and suburban centers. and transportation corridors; by identifying rural reserves to remain permanently outside the UGB (including farm and forest land and prominent natural features); and by adapting transportation improvements to the goals" (Abbott, 2002, p. 431). Since the release of the report in 1994, the ideas and suggestions that were actually implemented have far surpassed the plans stated in the report. In October 2002, a study by the Portland Business Alliance found that in the Pearl District alone (most of "downtown") had 1,600 Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 285 housing units. Compared to the amount ofhousing units in Census Tract 1101 in 2000 (1,896 units), this is an upsetting fact considering San Antonio, Texas is twice the size of Portland, Oregon in population. Furthermore, new residential units continue to arise all over downtown Portland, from the South Waterfront to the West End to the Eastside, each having multi-million dollar infill housing projects planned. Most new units are provided through rehabilitation of existing historie buildings but some are new development. Portland also reduces sprawl by implementing the transportation that the people asked for in the Region 2040 report. A very effective light rai! transit system has been running since 1986. Though Port land, Oregon is a small town, the Urban Growth Boundary and subsequent policies and reports have proven to be an effective way to plan for the future of a cities growth.

4.2 Planned and Future Growth of San Antonio

The foJlowing subchapters discuss the planned and possible alternatives for future growth in San Antonio. Before implementation of a revitalization effort, it is best to understand guidelines and principles to a new form ofurban development. 4.2.1 River North Master Plan In December 2008, the City of San Antonio released the Master Plan for River North, a 377-acre revitalized area just north of downtown. The plan has been years in the making and coHaborated upon by a team of architects, developers, planners, and city officials. The specific area was chosen based on its severe underutilization and "because the San Antonio River flows through this area into Downtown, and because that reach of the River - the Museum Reach - is currently being improved as an impetus for change" (River North Master Plan, 2008, 1:1). One of its few visions is: "to create mixed-income mixed-use urban residentiaI neighborhoods" (RNMP, 2008, 1:llJ). lt realizes each vision in tive carefully planned new neighborhoods: The River Corridor, the Performing Arts Neighborhood, the Museum Neighborhood, the Broadway Neighborhood, and the Madison Square Park Neighborhood. "The neighborhoods of River North are envisioned as vital, mixed-use, mixed-income places that provide high quality urban Iiving environments for households spanning a wide range of types, sizes and means" (RNMP, 2008, 2:3). Mixed-income housing also means and thus the city has planned for 15% of the proposed amount of dwelling units to be affordable. Although most people might disagree with this, the City of San Antonio understands that one cost of sprawl is social segregation and by mixing c1asses the residents can learn to grow with different people as opposed to living in a bubble ofHNot In My BackYard" (NIMBY) (Duany et al., 2000, p. x.). This sort of thinking furthers the problem and makes suburban isolation perpetually worse. Chapter One and Two of the Plan introduce and discuss more visions and principles as weH as the form and character possible for the area. Along with street improvements, curb extensions, and other public realm considerations, the "plan proposes an active effort to encourage and support mixed-income housing development in River North, and expects that 286 Jennifer Flores & Sedef Doganer such housing will contribute to the creation of an attractive sense of place" (RNMP, 2008, 3:15). Each "neighborhood" will implement a mixture of commercial, residential, and civic buildings at varying heights in two different scenarios, which put emphasis on either residential or commercial. Regardless of which scenario, each plan presents a large amount of new dweIIing units compared to what currently exists in the underutilized area. Furthermore, "proximity to the core inherently improves the affordability of Iiving in River North by offering many employees of the Central Business District (CBD) the opportunity to walk to work or use public transportation rather than relying solelyon the automobile" (RNMP, 2008, 3:15). A rail trolley is proposed to connect River North and downtown so that residents can easily get around without a car.

4.3 Alternatives to Sprawl

Revitalization is an effective way of fixing a city when deterioration has robbed the core of its value and vitality. As opposed to , which would require demolishing the existing context, revitalization preserves historie buildings thus creating a green environment. But how can we avoid sprawl at all costs and towards the future? The following are just three types of alternatives to sprawl: smart growth, new , and sustainable urban development. Though not new techniques, they provide principles for cities that are planl,1ing for the future. . 4.3.1 Smart Growth "Broadly defined, smart growth is managed growth that attempts to fulfill the need to provide for growth (both economic and in population) while at the same time limiting the undesirable impacts of that growth" (GilJham, 2002, p. 156). However, it is aimed at being used more so as a framework as opposed to Iimiting growth. The Smart Growth Network describes it as a movement saying, "Spurring the smart growth movement are demographie shifts, a strong environmental ethic, increased fiscal concerns, and more nuanced views of growth. The result is both a new demand and a new opportunity for smart growth" (National Center for Appropriate Technology, n.d.). Smart growth general principles incIude: open space conservation, growth boundaries, compact developments, revitalization of older areas, provide a range of housing choices, public transit, coordination, and equitabIe sharing of resources. In terms of housing, the Smart Growth Network has multiple guidelines and principles. "Smart growth represents an opportunity for local communities to increase housing choice not only by modifying their land use patterns on newly­ developed land, but also by increasing housing supply in existing neighborhoods and on land served by existing infrastructure." (NCAT, n.d.) In regards to along the San Antonio River Walk, a few different principles can be used. "Create incIusionary zoning, which requires new construction to incIude a portion of units; create increased zoning for construction ofmulti-family and rental housing units; allow increased density near waterfront amenities; ...while addressing public-access issues and Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 287

environmental impacts; provide seasonal rentals and time-shares" (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2009). Again, smart growth may appear obvious but it is a good framework for growth. It considers the society, economy, landscape and future. 4.3.2 New urbanism can be defined as trying to make a community walkable, where land uses are incorporated and buildings are at a human scale. "Although and smart growth reflect broader planning interests, the new urbanists believe their community revitalization efforts engage these strategies to realize their aesthetic, and land-use goals" (Larsen, 2005, p. 797). New urbanists deal with planning on a more local level versus a universal solution. Unfortunately, there is yet to be absolute proof of new urbanism curing suburban sprawl and improving quality of life. Still, firms across the nation try to implement the principles of new urbanism daily using the principles set forth by Duany et al. (2000), authors of Suburban Nation and founders of the Congress for the New Urbanism. The principles include: a square, plaza, or green space is located at the center of the neighborhood, dwellings are within 2,000 ft. of this center, a variety of dwelling types, shops and offices are at the edge of the neighborhood, streets are narrow and flanked by trees, buildings are built close to the street, and parking is located in the back of buildings and houses. Also, "according to the new urbanists, 'infill development ... conserves environmental resources, economic investment, and social fabric, while reclaiming marginal and abandoned areas. Metropolitan regions should develop strategies to encourage such infill development over peripheral expansion" (Leccese & McCormick, 2000, p. vii; Larsen, 2005, p. 798). In regards to housing, the Congress for the New Urbanism "views the neighborhood as the building block of healthy cities and towns" (Congress for the New Urbanism, n.d., p. 2). Diversity, architectural character, and accessibility are just a few of the principles created in an entirely separate set of principles for designing neighborhoods. "The building types-houses, row houses, and small buildings-have been designed to be suitable for family living without the need for large operating and maintenance staffs required by high-rise construction. clearance has given way to historie preservation, repair, and restoration. The emphasis is on designing new development as a seamless part of larger existing neighborhoods and communities" (CNU, n.d., p.34). The objective is to involve the community in planning and let the neighborhood evolve traditionally. San Antonio can immediately utilize the principles set forth by the new urbanists in its vision and implementation of the River North Master Plan. As most of the new construction has yet to be designed, architects can set the trend in the area for more new urbanism. In addition, local historie preservations can utilize the same principles in rehabilitating historie buildings for reuse. 288 Jennifer Flores & SedefDoganer

4.3.3 Sustainable Urban Development Compared to the aforementioned alternatives, sustainable urban development is on a different level, in that it directly impacts humankind. It can be defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) as "development, which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (WCED, 1987)." alone i8 defined in three parts as "environmental, economic, and social" (Tweed & Sutherland, 2007, p. 63). In terms of urban development, the role of the architect and planner change slightly from tradition al methods. The architect must playa more participatory part in interacting with the numerous teams that plan a city. "Sustainability is seen as a process for transforn1ing society from an exploitative, consumerist enterprise to an equitable society where the balances between human enterprises and between humankind and nature are negotiated locally (Jenks, Williams, Burton, 2000, p. 293). Thus 'sustainable urban development' is designing buildings, Iimiting spending, and planning social interactions, all while being resourceful. In an effort to implement a , so me features include: humanly-scaled urban form, compactness, self-balancing, spaces for possibilities. More importantly than the physical built urban forn1 i8 the form in which resources can thrive and be reused by all. On a micro level, buildings should be designed with the fol1owing eight categories in mind: building materials, recycling and waste management, energy, domestic water, power signal and control, adaptability, landscape, and transportation" (Jenks et al., 2000, p. 273). In more specific terms, downtown San Antonio can also use cultural and historic buildings as a means of developing sustainably. "Built heritage attracts tourists, particularly to established heritage cities, who boost the local and national economy" (Tweed & Sutherland, 2007, p. 63). Additional1y, construction costs are lower and therefore aid the economy; as weil as value and a sense of place are added to help the society identify with the city. "There are two principal attractions to living in the city. The first is the historie eharacter and allure ofthe residential space available; the seeond is the eonvenienee of the loeation ... Creating a vibrant '' in an area without a tradition of residential population needs a eritieal mass of development and takes a number of years to oeeur" (Heath et a1., 1996, p.98). Thu8, San Antonio i8 poised for a sustainable revitalization if it can successfully reuse its historic buildings and envision a future environment and society while designing new, resourceful architeeture.

5 Conclusion

Sprawl i8 indeed a growth phenomenon. Given its history it may seem that sprawl was and eontinues to be inevitable. Mortgage loans and the automobile drove the evolution of "suburbia" and soon million of families made the "Ameriean Dream" a reality. Almost immediately, however, the reality of suburban life was beeoming harmful to American soeiety and resources. Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 289

"Subdivisions" were creating social segregation and unsustainability while the automobile was causing pollution due to eommuting. Simultaneous to these detrimental costs arising were downtowns across the nation becoming no longer fashionable for living. Therefore, while the jobs remained downtown, the residents of the city were moving out. San Antonio, Texas is no exception. At the turn of the century, San Antonio was the biggest city in Texas. Despite the Great Depression slowing growth, the decision to beautify the River Walk in 1934 was a stimulating one indeed. Resident:;; were proud to live and work along such an attraction and tourists were lining up to visit. After the Second World War and the federal government offering mortgage loans, San Antonio experienced its first big sprawl. Although the River Walk was still a success with tourists, many residents no longer called downtown "horne". Therefore, since the 1950s, the number of households in downtown San Antonio has continually decreased. There are alternatives to this admitted problem. According to one case study, the city of Portland, Oregon realized the problem early and decided to lessen the effects as soon as possible. The first American city to implement an "Urban Growth Boundary" along with a future growth plan proved that reducing sprawl is possible. In the case of Washington D.C., they proved that revitalizing their downtown meant to rehabilitate existing buildings. As old buildings were redesigned for occupancy, they were converted to apartments, condominiums, or a mix of uses. In each case, transportation played a large role and techniques such as a light rail and free bus transit proved to successfully in attracting more locals to reside downtown. The city of San Antonio is also doing a great deal to revitalize their under-utilized downtown. Plans such as the River North Master Plan and the River Improvement Distriets have the future in mind. Though buildings are not currently designed yet, streetscapes and studies have been earried out in order to understand the true needs of downtown. Considering San Antonio's rieh history, buildings eould easily be rehabilitated for reuse like that ofWashington D.C. Although the alternatives diseussed have similar goals, their prineiples differ slightly. New urbanism can be used on the local level to design such features as town squares and green spaees while smart growth's guidelines are used as a framework for current and future design. Sustainable urban development is the broadest of the alternatives, however, considers the resourcefulness of future environments and quality of living for future generations. By using the principles defined under new urbanism, smart growth, and sustainable urban development, San Antonio should successfully be able to revitalize its historie downtown.

References

Abbott, c., & Gibson, K. (2002). City Profile: Portland, Oregon. Cities , 19 (6), 425-436. 290 Jennifer Flores & SedefDoganer

Breen, A., & Rigby, D. (2004). Intown Living: A Different American Dream. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Bruegmann, R. (2005). Sprawl: A Compact History. , IL: The University of Chicago Press. BurcheII, R. W., Downs, A., McCann, B., & Mukherji, S. (2005). Sprawl Costs: Economic Impacts ofUnchecked Development. Washington D.C.: Island Press. City of San Antonio. (2008). River North District Master Plan. Planning and Development Services Dept. Chapters 1-3. Congress for the New Urbanism (n.d.). Principles for Inner City Neighborhood Design. Retrieved December 6,2009, from http://www.cnu.org/sites/www.cnu.orglfiles/inner-city.pdf Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E., & Speck, J. (2000). Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the DecIine ofthe American Dream. , NY: North Point Press. Fisher, L. F. (1997). Crown Jewel ofTexas: The Story of San Antonio's River. San Antonio, TX: Maverick Publishing Company. Gale, D. E. (1987). Washington, D.C.: Inner-City Revitalization and Minority Suburbanization. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Gillham, O. (2002). The Limitless City: A Primer On the Urban Sprawl Debate. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (1996). Revitalizing Historic Urban Quarters. : Architectural Press. Howland, L. (1998). Washington Embraces Mixed-Use Development. In R.Kemp (Ed.), The Inner City: A Handbook for Renewal (pp. 320-324). North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers. Jenks, M., Williams, K., Burton, E. (Eds.). (2000). Achieving Sustainable Urban Form. London: Spon Press. Larsen, K. (2005). New Urbanism's Role in Inner-City Neighborhood Revitalization. Housing Studies, 20 (5), 795-813. Metro. (2002).2002-2022 Urban Growth Report: A Residential Land Need Analysis. Portland, Oregon. Mitchell, V. H., & University of Texas at San Antonio, D. o. (1976). Housing for Downtown San Antonio. M.A. Thesis. National Center for Appropriate Technology. (n.d.). Smart Growth Network Online . Smart Growth Online . Retrieved November 13,2009, from http://www .smartgrowth.org/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2009). ELEMENT 3: Provide a Range ofHousing Choices. Coastal and Waterfront Smart Growth. Retrieved November 13,2009, from http://coastalsmartgrowth.noaa.gov/elementslhousing.html Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 291

Tweed, C., & Sutherland, M. (2007). Built Cultural Heritage and sustainabJe urban development. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83, 62-69. US. Census Bureau. (2002). Demographie Trends in the 20th Century. Retrieved Oetober 19,2009, from http://www.eensus.gov/prod/2002pubs/eensr­ 4.pdf U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). Texas: 2000 Population and Housing Counts. Retrieved October 20,2009, from http://www .census.gov /prod/ cen2000/phc- 3-45. pdf The World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future, Report of the W orid Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Author.