SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2

[spoonman]

^They certainly sold it well didn't they

[spoonman]

I found this rendering in the Toronto Forum. I would like to see a residential tower that looks sleek like this...
http://www.architectsalliance.com/images/projects/distillery-district_2.jpg

Actually I don't think this is unlike Cosmo Square...Poor poor Cosmo Square :(

[SDDTProspector]

I watched the video, I don't care how they try to polish it..... It s still a square box!!!! with ugly windows!!!! looks like it should be in the mid west... not San Diego

[spoonman]

The Pei Cobb tower resembles both the Reed Elsevier building and Corporate Center

Reed Elsevier
http://www.hines.com/toolkit_images/Project%20Photos/Golden%20Eagle%20Plaza/Golden%20Eagle%20Plaza_lres_web.jpg

Corporate Center
http://www.chrisaustinphotography.com/temp/sd/IMG_3445.jpg

[spoonman]

I watched the video, I don't care how they try to polish it..... It s still a square box!!!! with ugly windows!!!! looks like it should be in the mid west... not San Diego

As a matter of personal opinion, I initially didn't think the building was right. It's not that I thought the building itself was bad, but that it was a letdown to those of us who had hoped for so much more from such a world renowned architecture firm. We were told that the tower would be a landmark building, but clearly it isn't. Finally, after some thought and comparing it to other projects I have come to accept the building because it is at least elegant in it's blandness. It's nothing special, but it's nothing like those "nautically inspired" sailboat towers we're seeing proposed everywhere. I hate to throw my hat in for mediocrity, but at least this building 1) Makes that area look less resort like 2) takes our city seriously and 3) is made of quality materials.

[bushman61988]

^They certainly sold it well didn't they

Yea they sold it well! That propoganda almost had me cheering for this tower. But after reading SDDTProspector's comment about it being a bland box, i came back to my senses...

This tower is NOT unique, and does NOT make that big a statement...for crying out loud, like someone said earlier, it looks like a brother of the Coporate Tower, and that Reed Silver (or whatever that name is) bldg.

I personally think if they would've just went with the old proposal for the site, which in my opinion is MUCH more unique, stand out, and world-class:
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y289/bushman61988/ROneSantaFePlace.jpg

[spoonman]

Sorry, I can't take any more fins on buildings

[spoonman]

Before I get attacked ;) ...did anyone notice how far along the Hilton is?

Photo by SanDiegoUrban
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y120/Jaygergon/Downtown%20Shots/IMG_8445.jpg

[bushman61988]

Sorry, I can't take any more fins on buildings

Personally, i really wouldnt consider this a fin, not even really a sail-like structure...it just flares up but it looks like it's part of the actual building and not just a crown.

Besides, what buildings in downtown San Diego today have fins, or anything that resembles fins???

[bushman61988]

Sorry, I can't take any more fins on buildings

Not that I'm trying to attack you, but I personally wouldnt consider these fins, or even sail-like structures. I say that cuz the renderings look like they're not even structures, but actually office parts of the building.
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y289/bushman61988/OneSantaFePlace.jpg

Besides, what fins do you see on buildings downtown?

[SDCAL]

Not that I'm trying to attack you, but I personally wouldnt consider these fins, or even sail-like structures. I say that cuz the renderings look like they're not even structures, but actually office parts of the building.
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y289/bushman61988/OneSantaFePlace.jpg

Besides, what fins do you see on buildings downtown?


I think these renderings look better because the buildings aren't white. The really tacky nautical ones that make the skyline look cheap tend to be white and the "fins" look like they are placed on it as an afterthought, at least these encorporate the design into the whole building, but I guess it's a mute point since these are old proposals

The Cobb-Pei tower is nice, it's just not the stellar defining piece of architecture that would set us apart. It's difficult to create a design that is unique, out of the box, yet not tacky. And, with our height restricions, it's even harder because that aspect of drama is lost. People bring up the transamerica tower in SF. It is a uniquely designed building, but would it be as well known if it wasn't so tall??

With the conservative nature of the architecture and the only daring architecture tending to be "theme-like" coupled with the height restrictions which really must hinder and restrict architects in their design, we are a long, long ways from an iconic world-famous structure downtown I'm afraid :(

[Derek]

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n71/farleybrandon/SD%20Bldg%20Pics/sfd.jpg

Anybody have any ideas of whats supposed to go in the "Existing Parking" next to Electra?

[mongoXZ]

^^I believe it's Bosa owned property.

On today's Union-Tribune:

Officials would like to attract NBA team
By Tanya Sierra
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

May 16, 2007

NATIONAL CITY – Now that the Chargers won't be relocating to National City, city officials are shifting their efforts to building a sports arena near the waterfront.


Advertisement City officials have been talking with Ernie Hahn II, who operates the San Diego Sports Arena, about bringing an arena to the 67-acre site the Chargers were considering.
Although no one would discuss details, Hahn said they would like the venue to house a National Basketball Association team.

The city's arena plans are preliminary. Officials need to secure financing, get buy-in from the Port of San Diego, which owns a majority of the site, and develop a land-use plan for the bayfront.

“There's always a struggle when you don't have a franchise, a team,” said National City Redevelopment Director Brad Raulston. “There's this chicken and egg between the team and the building. You need to have a building to lure the team.”

Officials say they prepared to develop the site as part of their stadium proposal. They surveyed residents and business owners and met with representatives of waterfront companies.

“The site has transportation advantages, a good location, and we understand the concerns of the maritime folks,” City Manager Chris Zapata said. “Coupled with the questionnaire, we realize there has to be a balance that is industry-and visitor-serving.”

Hahn started looking for new arena sites in 2003. He considered National City and Chula Vista, and said National City has the will and creativity to make an arena possible.

“I think they've got a very proactive management team from the mayor's office all the way down to redevelopment, which is always a positive,” Hahn said.

Although Hahn said he is focused on improving the San Diego Sports Arena, he's open to meeting with National City officials.

Last week, after Mayor Ron Morrison announced the city was dropping its bid to host a Chargers stadium, he said “discussions with a number of people” about a sports arena were under way.

Other than Hahn, city officials would not reveal names.

“There have been discussions and people are interested, but nobody is comfortable with going public on bringing a team to town,” Raulston said.

Past local sports arena proposals – in Chula Vista in 1973 and in downtown San Diego and Sorrento Valley in the early '90s – have failed.

In 2003, Hahn's Arena Group 2000 hired Raulston to help search for a new arena location. Raulston said that even without an arena, National City is poised to change its marina district.

“We need to figure out a way to make it more efficient, more lucrative and more recreational,” he said.

Raulston said an arena requires 5 to 7 acres, far less than a football stadium.

Members of the Working Waterfront Group, a coalition of maritime-industrial businesses, opposed a stadium at the site because they say it would harm their businesses. They also disapprove of an arena, said Sharon Cloward, executive director of the San Diego Port Tenants Association.

“We don't have enough land down there now,” Cloward said.

Morrison said the site is one of the last sites in the county that can accommodate an arena because of its freeway and public transportation access. He said he wants a comprehensive plan for the entire waterfront.

“We do not want the waterfront association or the maritime groups to think we're digging into their territory,” he said. “We're not. We want to make it better for them.”

[mongoXZ]

So this Pei Cobb tower was inspired by a 19th century Chicago building. :rolleyes:

Design of downtown high-rise unveiled
By Mike Freeman
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

May 16, 2007
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070516/images/irvine220.jpg



Architecture for the Irvine Co.'s 700 West Broadway was inspired by the Monadnock building in Chicago, built in 1893.
The Irvine Co. debuted what it calls a dignified rather than flashy design yesterday for its planned 34-story office tower in downtown San Diego, the latest proposed addition to the city's skyline.
The Orange County real estate giant, already the dominant landlord downtown, yesterday began showing off the proposed architecture for its 685,000-square-foot high-rise at Broadway and Pacific Highway.

The building, which Irvine is calling 700 West Broadway, would be the largest single office tower in the city's core on a square-footage basis. Construction is slated to begin as early as mid-2008 and take 2½ years to complete.

The initial plans were unveiled for a design committee of the Centre City Development Corp., the city's downtown redevelopment arm. The redevelopment agency must approve the design.

Henry N. Cobb, a co-founder of well-known New York architecture firm Pei Cobb Freed & Partners, has been hired as the lead designer on the building. Renowned architect I.M. Pei is also a founder of the firm.

Cobb, 81, has been the principal design partner on the John Hancock Tower in Boston, the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles and the World Trade Center and Grand Marina Hotel, both in Barcelona, Spain.

The architecture was inspired by the Monadnock building in Chicago, built in 1893, Cobb said in a statement.

“I believe that 700 West Broadway will be elegant, characterized by calm, timeless and classic architecture that will be fresh and functional in 100 years,” he said. “It will stand with quiet authority, and be a pause in the visual landscape, a cornerstone.”



Advertisement Designing towers that stand out in the San Diego core can be tricky. The Federal Aviation Administration sets height limits on buildings because of downtown's proximity to Lindbergh Field. Many towers are roughly the same height, giving the city's skyline less vertical contrast than those of some other cities.
In January, Irvine bought the roughly 1½-acre site at the northeast corner of Broadway and Pacific Highway from Canadian condominium developer Nat Bosa. The company paid $60 million for the land, according to county deed records.

While Irvine won't reveal the cost of the tower, it would likely surpass $300 million, based on comparisons with other recent projects.

Irvine went with travertine stone siding rather than steel or concrete. The building will be 50 percent glass and 50 percent stone.

Among its features are a flared crown on the 480-foot structure, which is about 20 feet shorter than the city's most distinctive tower, One America Plaza, about one block east.

It also includes architectural features on the ground level that seek to tie in with the Santa Fe Depot next door.

A restaurant and fountain are earmarked for the ground floor along Broadway, with the main lobby fronting Pacific Highway. The building will meet energy-efficiency standards set by the U.S. Green Building Council.

Bradley Neil, Irvine's vice president of architecture for commercial property, said the classic design aims to make the tower “an anchor at this end of town.”

He said the skyline on downtown's west end is “fairly busy” with unusual rooflines at One America Plaza, Emerald Plaza and some proposed hotel projects on Lane Field, across Pacific Highway from Irvine's site.

Though most of its buildings are in Orange County, Irvine has made a major bet on San Diego commercial real estate in the past three years.

Best known as the developer of 93,000-acre Irvine Ranch, which today makes up a good portion of the city of Irvine, the company spent nearly $1 billion acquiring six of the roughly 12 top-quality office towers in downtown San Diego. Its holdings include One America Plaza, the Wells Fargo Building, Symphony Towers, the Koll Center and the NBC Building.

On top of its downtown deals, the company also spent an additional $1 billion this year to acquire the San Diego office portfolio of Equity Office Properties, which included several high-rises in University City. Irvine is now the top landlord in UTC as well as downtown.

The 700 West Broadway project would be Irvine's first development deal downtown – and it could put competitive pressure on Navy Broadway Complex developer Doug Manchester, who also plans offices in his project at the foot of Broadway and Harbor Drive.

[keg92101]

[QUOTE=bushman61988;2838249]Yea they sold it well! That propoganda almost had me cheering for this tower. But after reading SDDTProspector's comment about it being a bland box, i came back to my senses...

This tower is NOT unique, and does NOT make that big a statement...for crying out loud, like someone said earlier, it looks like a brother of the Coporate Tower, and that Reed Silver (or whatever that name is) bldg.

I personally think if they would've just went with the old proposal for the site, which in my opinion is MUCH more unique, stand out, and world-class:

If you look at the night renderings of 700 W Broaday, and understand how much of an important role lighting plays in architecture, belive me, this building will stand out more than anything. They just want something that is timeless, which this building will be.

[OCtoSD]

I agree with this quote, the skyline was starting to get a little to flashy, with all the Vancouver buildings. This will add a quiet and interesting elegance. The Reed Elsevier building is a perfect box with no crown. This building goes in and out and then flares at the top. If you think this building is boring, Boston has 4 buildings that are boxy, and are the same color. That is annoying, this is classy and provides some variety, even to much flashy glass can be monotonous. Hopefully they will use some nice granite.

"The site demands and deserves a tower with great presence and integrity. I believe that 700 West Broadway will be elegant, characterized by calm, timeless and classic architecture that will be fresh and functional in 100 years. It will stand with quiet authority and be a pause in the visual landscape, a cornerstone"

[eburress]

Anybody have any ideas of whats supposed to go in the "Existing Parking" next to Electra?

That's going to be the "mystery tower" we've seen in so many renderings.

[eburress]

^^I believe it's Bosa owned property.

On today's Union-Tribune:

Officials would like to attract NBA team
By Tanya Sierra
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

May 16, 2007

NATIONAL CITY – Now that the Chargers won't be relocating to National City, city officials are shifting their efforts to building a sports arena near the waterfront.


Advertisement City officials have been talking with Ernie Hahn II, who operates the San Diego Sports Arena, about bringing an arena to the 67-acre site the Chargers were considering.
Although no one would discuss details, Hahn said they would like the venue to house a National Basketball Association team.

The city's arena plans are preliminary. Officials need to secure financing, get buy-in from the Port of San Diego, which owns a majority of the site, and develop a land-use plan for the bayfront.

“There's always a struggle when you don't have a franchise, a team,” said National City Redevelopment Director Brad Raulston. “There's this chicken and egg between the team and the building. You need to have a building to lure the team.”

Officials say they prepared to develop the site as part of their stadium proposal. They surveyed residents and business owners and met with representatives of waterfront companies.

“The site has transportation advantages, a good location, and we understand the concerns of the maritime folks,” City Manager Chris Zapata said. “Coupled with the questionnaire, we realize there has to be a balance that is industry-and visitor-serving.”

Hahn started looking for new arena sites in 2003. He considered National City and Chula Vista, and said National City has the will and creativity to make an arena possible.

“I think they've got a very proactive management team from the mayor's office all the way down to redevelopment, which is always a positive,” Hahn said.

Although Hahn said he is focused on improving the San Diego Sports Arena, he's open to meeting with National City officials.

Last week, after Mayor Ron Morrison announced the city was dropping its bid to host a Chargers stadium, he said “discussions with a number of people” about a sports arena were under way.

Other than Hahn, city officials would not reveal names.

“There have been discussions and people are interested, but nobody is comfortable with going public on bringing a team to town,” Raulston said.

Past local sports arena proposals – in Chula Vista in 1973 and in downtown San Diego and Sorrento Valley in the early '90s – have failed.

In 2003, Hahn's Arena Group 2000 hired Raulston to help search for a new arena location. Raulston said that even without an arena, National City is poised to change its marina district.

“We need to figure out a way to make it more efficient, more lucrative and more recreational,” he said.

Raulston said an arena requires 5 to 7 acres, far less than a football stadium.

Members of the Working Waterfront Group, a coalition of maritime-industrial businesses, opposed a stadium at the site because they say it would harm their businesses. They also disapprove of an arena, said Sharon Cloward, executive director of the San Diego Port Tenants Association.

“We don't have enough land down there now,” Cloward said.

Morrison said the site is one of the last sites in the county that can accommodate an arena because of its freeway and public transportation access. He said he wants a comprehensive plan for the entire waterfront.

“We do not want the waterfront association or the maritime groups to think we're digging into their territory,” he said. “We're not. We want to make it better for them.”

An NBA team is one of the MAIN things the SD area is lacking, IMO. Although I would prefer a downtown arena, a NC waterfront arena would be nice too.

[SDCAL]

By Mike Freeman
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

"The Federal Aviation Administration sets height limits on buildings because of downtown's proximity to Lindbergh Field. Many towers are roughly the same height, giving the city's skyline less vertical contrast than those of some other cities".


A nice way of saying our skyline is starting to look like a plateau with no dramaric height. At least the mainstream media is acknowledging it, maybe it will start getting people to think about the potential of our skyline if a few over 500ft buildings were allowed to punctuate it

The say the FAA, but I thought there was a local law?? I wonder if developers can challenge the height restriction? Obviously if it's an FAA restriction they would never OK something really tall, but even if we could start with something 550-600 ft at least it would give the skyline some depth!!!

[SDCAL]

A fedral study of airports, this article is in all the major national media publications, San Diego named one of US cities that must solve it's airport problem or face lost revenue in the near future. It really irritates me that we have some many jackasses in this city who think Lindergh is fine the way it is. This was a national study by the FAA, do these fools who are against a new airport think people are making this up??????????????? !!!!

FAA: U.S. airports must expand to meet demand
Posted 21h 8m ago | Comments 20 | Recommend 12 E-mail | Save | Print |




ATLANTA — A number of major U.S. cities must expand existing airports in the next two decades, build new ones or find other solutions to meet an increasing demand for air travel, according to a federal report released Tuesday.
The Federal Aviation Administration released the latest version of its study, titled "Capacity Needs in the National Airspace System." The report examined anticipated changes to airport capacity through 2025, and said city airports including Atlanta, Las Vegas, Chicago and San Diego need to expand soon.

Against the backdrop of the world's busiest airfield, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters on Tuesday praised Atlanta and Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport for building another runway and new air traffic control towers. Peters also announced a $1 million grant to study further capacity expansion in Atlanta.

"By 2025, cities like Atlanta, Las Vegas, Chicago and San Diego are going to risk the lost revenue, lost business and lost appeal that comes with chronic delay," Peters said. "Atlanta's leaders will have to embrace new airports and new ways of thinking."

Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Marion Blakey said Tuesday that the current number of air passengers is "sounding a siren that must be responded to" with a regional approach.

FIND MORE STORIES IN: Tuesday | Atlanta | Federal Aviation Administration | Airports | Cities | Peters | Capacity | Federal report
Airports in Boston, Cleveland, Los Angeles, St. Louis and Minneapolis-St. Paul have also recently opened new runways.

The FAA study began in 2003 reviewing 291 commercial service airports, and whittled that down to the 56 most at risk of overcapacity.

After the completion of the first version of this study in 2004, it was recommended that Atlanta expand immediately. The city made substantial improvements since, but aviation officials warned it will need to address growing passenger demand before 2025.

Four airports were identified as needing to expand capacity immediately, including New York's LaGuardia Airport, Newark Liberty International, O'Hare International Airport and Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International.

[bmfarley]

The say the FAA, but I thought there was a local law?? I wonder if developers can challenge the height restriction? Obviously if it's an FAA restriction they would never OK something really tall, but even if we could start with something 550-600 ft at least it would give the skyline some depth!!!
I've never heard of it being from a local law. I always heard it was an FAA thing because of Lindbergh.

[bushman61988]

By Mike Freeman
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

"The Federal Aviation Administration sets height limits on buildings because of downtown's proximity to Lindbergh Field. Many towers are roughly the same height, giving the city's skyline less vertical contrast than those of some other cities".


A nice way of saying our skyline is starting to look like a plateau with no dramaric height. At least the mainstream media is acknowledging it, maybe it will start getting people to think about the potential of our skyline if a few over 500ft buildings were allowed to punctuate it

The say the FAA, but I thought there was a local law?? I wonder if developers can challenge the height restriction? Obviously if it's an FAA restriction they would never OK something really tall, but even if we could start with something 550-600 ft at least it would give the skyline some depth!!!

It just makes NO sense to me whatsoever to have that 500 foot height limit over the ENTIRE downtown area...no sense at all..

Look how high buildings are that airplanes fly so close to, such as the Symphony Towers. Why would they place a height limit over the rest of downtown that is nowhere near the flight path?..I mean, even in an emergency, planes shouldnt be flying over downtown b/c the runway is oriented much more east-west and if a plane did need to fly over downtown, i cant see how it could possibly align itself and land on the runway.

The FAA should have kind of a stepped height limit approach, with height limits for 500 feet for the areas close to the runway approach, and the height limit should increase the farther from the flight path it is.

why the hell don't any developers challenge this ridiculous limit?

[SDCAL]

Los Angeles - - proposed resdiential/hotel complet, taller tower will be over 70 stories, will be the tallest residential building west of Chicago, supposed to break ground next year - - what do you think, LA's newer architectural renderings better than SDs??

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...nfigId=1000837

[SDCAL]

Los Angeles - - proposed resdiential/hotel complet, taller tower will be over 70 stories, will be the tallest residential building west of Chicago, supposed to break ground next year - - what do you think, LA's newer architectural renderings better than SDs??

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...nfigId=1000837

dammit, image didn't show up - - anyway, here is the link:

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ews_view_popup

www.parkfifth.com

[SDCAL]

It just makes NO sense to me whatsoever to have that 500 foot height limit over the ENTIRE downtown area...no sense at all..

Look how high buildings are that airplanes fly so close to, such as the Symphony Towers. Why would they place a height limit over the rest of downtown that is nowhere near the flight path?..I mean, even in an emergency, planes shouldnt be flying over downtown b/c the runway is oriented much more east-west and if a plane did need to fly over downtown, i cant see how it could possibly align itself and land on the runway.

The FAA should have kind of a stepped height limit approach, with height limits for 500 feet for the areas close to the runway approach, and the height limit should increase the farther from the flight path it is.

why the hell don't any developers challenge this ridiculous limit?

i agree but no developer wants to spend the time/money on legal challenges to a Federal agency, why do it when you can just develop in a larger city without the height restrictions?? there are even shorter restrictions closer to the airport, there is a building now that is in a bunch of legal wrangling that is right next to the airport and it went a floor or two over and now there are all these lawsuits with the city, FAA, etc it's a mess and I don't blame a developer for not wanting to go through the hassle

[SDCAL]

CAN SOMEONE HELP

Not to sound like complete moron, but could someone please post directions for inserting pictures from other sources onto these posts? when i try, they never come out :(

thnks

[SDDTProspector]

FEHLMAN & LABARRE website has picture of the 13 Floor Office project...

Can't find a way to add the links... so here is the website

http://www.fehlmanlabarre.com/#projects

[Crackertastik]

That's going to be the "mystery tower" we've seen in so many renderings.


which renderings?

[Derek]

That's going to be the "mystery tower" we've seen in so many renderings.

I hope we see it soon!;)

[Derek]

On today's Union-Tribune:

Officials would like to attract NBA team
By Tanya Sierra
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

May 16, 2007

NATIONAL CITY – Now that the Chargers won't be relocating to National City, city officials are shifting their efforts to building a sports arena near the waterfront.


Advertisement City officials have been talking with Ernie Hahn II, who operates the San Diego Sports Arena, about bringing an arena to the 67-acre site the Chargers were considering.
Although no one would discuss details, Hahn said they would like the venue to house a National Basketball Association team.

The city's arena plans are preliminary. Officials need to secure financing, get buy-in from the Port of San Diego, which owns a majority of the site, and develop a land-use plan for the bayfront.

“There's always a struggle when you don't have a franchise, a team,” said National City Redevelopment Director Brad Raulston. “There's this chicken and egg between the team and the building. You need to have a building to lure the team.”

Officials say they prepared to develop the site as part of their stadium proposal. They surveyed residents and business owners and met with representatives of waterfront companies.

“The site has transportation advantages, a good location, and we understand the concerns of the maritime folks,” City Manager Chris Zapata said. “Coupled with the questionnaire, we realize there has to be a balance that is industry-and visitor-serving.”

Hahn started looking for new arena sites in 2003. He considered National City and Chula Vista, and said National City has the will and creativity to make an arena possible.

“I think they've got a very proactive management team from the mayor's office all the way down to redevelopment, which is always a positive,” Hahn said.

Although Hahn said he is focused on improving the San Diego Sports Arena, he's open to meeting with National City officials.

Last week, after Mayor Ron Morrison announced the city was dropping its bid to host a Chargers stadium, he said “discussions with a number of people” about a sports arena were under way.

Other than Hahn, city officials would not reveal names.

“There have been discussions and people are interested, but nobody is comfortable with going public on bringing a team to town,” Raulston said.

Past local sports arena proposals – in Chula Vista in 1973 and in downtown San Diego and Sorrento Valley in the early '90s – have failed.

In 2003, Hahn's Arena Group 2000 hired Raulston to help search for a new arena location. Raulston said that even without an arena, National City is poised to change its marina district.

“We need to figure out a way to make it more efficient, more lucrative and more recreational,” he said.

Raulston said an arena requires 5 to 7 acres, far less than a football stadium.

Members of the Working Waterfront Group, a coalition of maritime-industrial businesses, opposed a stadium at the site because they say it would harm their businesses. They also disapprove of an arena, said Sharon Cloward, executive director of the San Diego Port Tenants Association.

“We don't have enough land down there now,” Cloward said.

Morrison said the site is one of the last sites in the county that can accommodate an arena because of its freeway and public transportation access. He said he wants a comprehensive plan for the entire waterfront.

“We do not want the waterfront association or the maritime groups to think we're digging into their territory,” he said. “We're not. We want to make it better for them.”

That's good!:tup:

As long as it is called the San Diego [insert team name here].

[Derek]

which renderings?

NBC renderings mainly, there is a tower behind it that isn't defined.

[eburress]

^^ It COULD be the San Diego Supersonics, which sounds VERY good! And works with the whole military town/Top Gun angle.

[mello]

This was a national study by the FAA, do these fools who are against a new airport think people are making this up??????????????? !!!!


Things like this simply infuriate me :hell: How can people blindly say that "oh no lindbergh is fine for generations" Where is Jerry Sanders, where is the County Supervisor?? This is there damn job to get things like this figured out.

People just go through there lives not thinking about the future. What happens when companies stop coming here or companies start leaving?? Then they will think "oh yeah wish we'd done something 50 FUCKING YEARS AGO"!!!!!

Do people understand the BILLIONS of dollars we give to metro LA's economy year after year after year because of our antiquated one runway airport.

**** Don't even get me started on our commercial shipping port. More billions we just say "here you go LA". Thanks may I have another. :whip:

[eburress]

^^ It's the growth conversation again, and SOOOO many people in San Diego don't want it. They want to keep SD the cozy little town it used to be.

[Derek]

Well...

Screw those people.:)



P.S. And yes, San Diego Supersonics sounds good, but I am a Clippers fan and would love to see them down here.;)

(Isn't Seattle currently fighting to keep the Supersonics in town?)

[mello]

It is so funny, though because this metro area is beyond the threshold of saying "Oh I'm anti growth". It isn't like we are talking about Boise, Spokane, Reno, Albaquerque, Las Cruces, Tucson, etc.

Metros of those size can still realistically have the conversation about growth and whether or not they want to move up in the world. San Diego is already a large established metro area of 3.5 million people. It is in the top 15 metros of a nation of 300 million people.

Our airport is so clearly antiquated and undersized for a metro of this size it is laughable.

Look at: Salt Lake City, Orlando, and Charlotte. Much smaller metros with airports that handle 10 million more passengers a year then SAN (if not much more than that).

Maybe the fact that LAX and Ontario are "fairly close" has kind of been like our crutch. Imagine if LA were 200 miles away instead of 100. Do you think we would have had a true dual/parallel runway international airport by now? I think so.

[OCtoSD]

The renderings of the 13 story building look great. It just looks weired next to the tacky ballpark self storage. That thing will hopefully get redeveloped soon. Its land is worth millions.

[sandiego_urban]

Ok, so let's not all get too excited about this, but I just saw this bit article from the online edition of the SD Daily Transcript. What could this be? New tallest? With the airport still there?

http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?SourceCode=20070516cxa



Company purchases land, proposes plans for tallest project in downtown San Diego

By THOR KAMBAN BIBERMAN, The Daily Transcript
Wednesday, May 16, 2007

A mixed-use development at 1270 Columbia St. in downtown San Diego is being planned for a local record-size 47-story tower with hotel and residential components, as well as a possible timeshare.

[Derek]

The renderings of the 13 story building look great. It just looks weired next to the tacky ballpark self storage. That thing will hopefully get redeveloped soon. Its land is worth millions.

I agree! That thing needs to go!:yuck:

[mongoXZ]

Company purchases land, proposes plans for tallest project in downtown San Diego

By THOR KAMBAN BIBERMAN, The Daily Transcript
Wednesday, May 16, 2007

A mixed-use development at 1270 Columbia St. in downtown San Diego is being planned for a local record-size 47-story tower with hotel and residential components, as well as a possible timeshare.

Isn't this the land where the cancelled Elle tower was supposed to be? And wasn't there a rendering called "Columbia Tower" posted earlier from the CW Kim website? That white one??????
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y120/Jaygergon/downtown%20development%203/kimprojectsst9.png

LADY'S AND GENTLEMEN I PRESENT TO YOU OUR FUTURE TALLEST!

Yeah, right. . .:sly:

[Derek]

Ok, so let's not all get too excited about this, but I just saw this bit article from the online edition of the SD Daily Transcript. What could this be? New tallest? With the airport still there?

http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?SourceCode=20070516cxa



Company purchases land, proposes plans for tallest project in downtown San Diego

By THOR KAMBAN BIBERMAN, The Daily Transcript
Wednesday, May 16, 2007

A mixed-use development at 1270 Columbia St. in downtown San Diego is being planned for a local record-size 47-story tower with hotel and residential components, as well as a possible timeshare.


That's cool! But a building can be 47 stories and still be under 500 feet.

[sandiego_urban]

Isn't this the land where the cancelled Elle tower was supposed to be? And wasn't there a rendering called "Columbia Tower" posted earlier from the CW Kim website? That white one??????
Yeah, that's what I was thinking, although the Kim website says it's 45 stories. I guess it could have been re-designed (We hope)


That's cool! But a building can be 47 stories and still be under 500 feet.
That might be true, but read the headline again. It says "......proposes plans for tallest project in downtown San Diego"

[eburress]

That's cool! But a building can be 47 stories and still be under 500 feet.

How tall is the current tallest?

[sandiego_urban]

^^ One America Plaza at 500 feet

[sandiego_urban]

FYI - Here is a list of the 20 tallest buildings downtown (completed/approved/proposed) from Emporis. It's not up-to-date, but it gives you some general info:


San Diego High-rise Buildings

# Building Name Height Floors Year Status
1. One America Plaza 500 ft 34 1991 completed
2. Symphony Towers 499 ft 34 1989 completed
3. Manchester Grand Hyatt 497 ft 40 1992 completed
4. Library Tower 478 ft 43 2008 approved
5. Cosmopolitan Square 2 478 ft 36 2008 approved
6. Electra 2 475 ft 43 2007 under construction
7. The Pinnacle Museum Tower 15 450 ft 36 2005 completed
8. Emerald Plaza [Emerald Plaza Center] 17 450 ft 30 1990 completed
9. Manchester Grand Hyatt.. [Manchester Grand Hyatt..] 32 446 ft 34 2003 completed
10. One Santa Fe Place [Santa Fe Place] 1 440 ft 26 approved
11. Pacific Highway @ E [Pacific Highway @ E] 425 ft 37 2009 approved
12. Harbor Club West [Harbor Club Condominiu..] 26 424 ft 41 1992 completed
13. Harbor Club East [Harbor Club Condominiu..] 23 424 ft 41 1992 completed
14. Vantage Pointe Condominium 1 420 ft 41 2008 under construction
15. The Grande North at Sa.. [Grande at Santa Fe Pla..] 3 420 ft 39 2005 completed
16. The Grande South at Sa.. [Grande at Santa Fe Pla..] 21 420 ft 39 2004 completed
17. Advanced Equities Plaza 7 412 ft 23 2005 completed
18. Mondrian 411 ft 42 2008 proposed
19. Bayside at the Embarcadero 1 395 ft 36 2009 under construction
20. Union Bank of California Building 16 388 ft 27 1969 completed

[SDDTProspector]

The renderings of the 13 story building look great. It just looks weired next to the tacky ballpark self storage. That thing will hopefully get redeveloped soon. Its land is worth millions.

I know for a fact that Oliver Mcmillan is working on a proposal now to turn that storage unit into a hotel that is approx the height as the Office tower. Even though the storage unit make them a boat load of money!!!!!

[eburress]

^^ One America Plaza at 500 feet

So then the proposed tower would have to be at least 501 feet ;)

[OCtoSD]

Awesome, I'm glad that self storage will go. Btw how do you get your info?

[Derek]

I know for a fact that Oliver Mcmillan is working on a proposal now to turn that storage unit into a hotel that is approx the height as the Office tower. Even though the storage unit make them a boat load of money!!!!!

Thats great. I mean, the storage unit is white and bright green, c'mon now.:rolleyes:

[Derek]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, although the Kim website says it's 45 stories. I guess it could have been re-designed (We hope)



That might be true, but read the headline again. It says "......proposes plans for tallest project in downtown San Diego"

That's true. I was just thinking that developers tend to say that buildings are taller based on floor count. I honestly don't think a 500 foot tower could go on that location though, because of its proximity to the flight path for Lindbergh Field.

[SDDTProspector]

They have a Crappy picture of the project.... And it looks taller then 500ft, some of their other projects are down right ugly!!!!

http://www.chhatrala.com/developments.htm

Hopefully... their webpage will provide more information later.

[keg92101]

I've never heard of it being from a local law. I always heard it was an FAA thing because of Lindbergh.

You are correct. If you read the Center City PDO, there are no height restrictions, other than areas around parks

[keg92101]

The renderings of the 13 story building look great. It just looks weired next to the tacky ballpark self storage. That thing will hopefully get redeveloped soon. Its land is worth millions.

The owner of Ballpark Storage is OliverMcMillan, and it makes more money for them than their apartment buildings. That is not going anywhere.

[SDDTProspector]

The owner of Ballpark Storage is OliverMcMillan, and it makes more money for them than their apartment buildings. That is not going anywhere.

We will see what happens in 6 months to a year from now.....:rolleyes:

You are correct OM makes a assload of money... It has been 95% occupied for the past 5 years... But changes will happening there!!!

I can't devolge much information.... But sources tells me that OM and ENDEV have been talking about various projects including that Ballpark Storage for development... Of course, talking and doing are two different thing!!!!

[Derek]

They have a Crappy picture of the project.... And it looks taller then 500ft, some of their other projects are down right ugly!!!!

http://www.chhatrala.com/developments.htm

Hopefully... their webpage will provide more information later.

It looks decent, the crown could maybe be re-worked though.

[OCtoSD]

You guys should look at the link for the 47 story hotel/condo development. There is a project in India that joins two towers with a big fake diamond. It's hilarious. :jester: Some are small pleasant hotels nothing more then a 100 rooms. I do not know how much we can depend on these guys. Going from doing a 5 story 100 room Holiday In in Oceanside to doing a 47 story luxury hotel condo is a big leap.

[spoonman]

Ok, so let's not all get too excited about this, but I just saw this bit article from the online edition of the SD Daily Transcript. What could this be? New tallest? With the airport still there?

http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?SourceCode=20070516cxa



Company purchases land, proposes plans for tallest project in downtown San Diego

By THOR KAMBAN BIBERMAN, The Daily Transcript
Wednesday, May 16, 2007

A mixed-use development at 1270 Columbia St. in downtown San Diego is being planned for a local record-size 47-story tower with hotel and residential components, as well as a possible timeshare.


Here is the rendering of the proposed 47 Floor building...
http://www.sddt.com/images/news/2007/05/15/til_1270_columbia.jpg

[spoonman]

^OCtoSD, I think that you are right about not depending on these guys too much. As far as the looks of the tower, it doesn't make me feel anything either way, but I wouldn't really care how it looks if we got a building over 500' built because it could open the way for more buildings over 500' which is really what's important.

[Derek]

^Good point.

[HurricaneHugo]

i dunno how to feel about this....

i think by tallest they just mean the one with the most floors, not actual height

[Derek]

^That's exactly what I was thinking.

The Columbia Center in Seattle is the tallest building on the west coast in terms of floor count at 76 floors.

The US Bank tower in LA is the tallest building on the west coast in terms of height at 1,018 feet.

[sandiegodweller]

You guys should look at the link for the 47 story hotel/condo development. There is a project in India that joins two towers with a big fake diamond. It's hilarious. :jester: Some are small pleasant hotels nothing more then a 100 rooms. I do not know how much we can depend on these guys. Going from doing a 5 story 100 room Holiday In in Oceanside to doing a 47 story luxury hotel condo is a big leap.


Exactly. I don't think that site is very attractive for a luxury hotel. You are competing with the W. It doesn't have any water views and it is too far from the convention center. I see an upscale Holiday Inn, Ramada, Hampton Inn, etc.

How do you afford to pay $404 psf for the dirt ($10,100,000 for 25,000 sf), build a 47 story hotel and make it pencil when the average rack rate is probably less than $200 per night?

FYI - they DID get a discount from the $17 million that the developers of the ELLE paid for the dirt a few years ago.

[bmfarley]

For what it is worth... the full Daily Transcript article concernign the airport. This was in yesterdays edition.

The Daily Transcript

Study: San Diego airport must grow, or risk losing revenue


San Diego is among several major U.S. cities that will need additional capacity by 2025 in order to meet increasing demand for air travel, according to a Federal Aviation Administration report released Tuesday.

The findings were part of the latest version of the FAA's study, "Capacity Needs in the National Airspace System."

The report examined anticipated changes to airport capacity through 2025, and said city airports, including San Diego, Atlanta, Las Vegas and Chicago, need to expand soon.

"What it shows is pretty much exactly what our studies have shown for several years -- both the airport master plan study and the site selection study," said Keith Wilschetz, director of planning for the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. "Essentially that San Diego International Airport will reach capacity constraints sometime between 2015 and 2025. It's very consistent with what we've said."

The FAA looked at four different criteria, including how much an airfield's flights are delayed and how a facility's constraint will affect other airports.

According to the FAA, San Diego will meet three of the criteria for constraint by 2015 and all four by 2025.

"By 2025, cities like Atlanta, Las Vegas, Chicago and San Diego are going to risk the lost revenue, lost business and lost appeal that comes with chronic delay," U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters said while announcing the results at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.

FAA Administrator Marion Blakey said Tuesday that the current number of air passengers is "sounding a siren that must be responded to" with a regional approach.

Airports in Boston, Cleveland, Los Angeles, St. Louis and Minneapolis-St. Paul have recently opened new runways.

The FAA study began in 2003, reviewing 291 commercial service airports, and whittled that down to the 56 most at risk of overcapacity.

Wilschetz said the FAA report won't cause the airport authority to renew discussions of a site selection process. The board will continue its focus on expanding the capacity of Lindbergh Field in its current location.

"I don't think the report tells us anything we didn't already know," he said. "We knew that there's going to be capacity problems in the future. That's really a big reason that the state legislature required us to do a site selection study. The results (of the vote) show people want to stay at Lindbergh Field for the foreseeable future."

If lawmakers or anyone else approaches the board with a site solution proposal, it would listen, Wilschetz said, but board members would not initiate discussions themselves.

The FAA, which doesn't build airports, can't force the issue, either, Wilschetz said.

"What they can do is encourage cities or regions to try and find new capacity," he said. "But it's up to individual cities to decide whether we want to do that or not."

The transportation department is working intensively to ease congestion in the skies over busy airports through advances in technology and is also seeking additional, market-based tools to fight congestion in the aviation reauthorization bill now before Congress.

Building new airports, expanding existing fields and taking better advantage of smaller regional airports are all solutions that must be considered to meet the demand for air travel that continues to grow, Peters said.

"This study makes it clear that we need to develop solutions that match travelers with the best way to get to their destinations," Peters said. "We must find a way to turn this challenge into an opportunity to keep our families free to travel and our businesses free to succeed."

[ucsbgaucho]

Public space drawings are called a first draft
By Jeanette Steele
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

May 17, 2007

DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO – Two building projects at landmark downtown sites got poor or mixed reviews yesterday from the city's downtown redevelopment agency.

Public space at Manchester Financial's Navy Broadway Complex development was lambasted by agency board member Teddy Cruz, who called the design of the pedestrian promenade that bisects the site “cartoony” and “incredibly mediocre.”

Board member Kim John Kilkenny said it looks like a private-sector shopping mall, not a public plaza.


Advertisement
The second project, a planned skyscraper across the street, was described as elegant but not the icon that was expected.

Manchester was selected in April 2006 to develop the 15-acre Navy waterfront parcel at Harbor Drive and Pacific Highway. In addition to a Navy administration building – the design of which the board praised in the past – the developer plans to build a Class A office building, hotels, retail stores and a museum or cultural center.

It was the board's first look at renderings of the plaza, which will be the major public part of the development in addition to a block-sized park.

The company's designs are scheduled to go before the downtown agency for a final green light next month.

After the meeting, Manchester President Perry Dealy said the drawings are just a first draft.

“It was clear from their comments that they want us to put more effort into a more pedestrian storefront look, and we're working on that,” Dealy said. “We heard their comments.”

Meanwhile, the Irvine Co. appeared before the board for preliminary review of the 34-story office building that has been billed as a potential signature piece of the waterfront skyline. The site is at Broadway and Pacific Highway.

Drawings show a massive stone building with wide windows and a flared crown. Chicago's Monadnock Building was an inspiration for the look. Irvine has described it as a “dignified” edifice that will anchor that end of Broadway.

Some board members seemed to question whether the design, by renowned New York architect Henry Cobb, lives up to the hype.

“I'd be hard-pressed to take a look at the building there and say it is iconic in the way the Transamerica Building (in San Francisco) is iconic,” said Fred Maas, board chairman.

Santa Monica architect Gwynne Pugh, a member of the agency's guest design panel, said that because of the “restrained quality” of the design, it may be more of a background building than a standout.

But the board also praised Irvine for using high-quality materials, such as the natural stone travertine, and for choosing a world-class architect in Cobb. The 81-year-old designer is famous for designing Boston's John Hancock Tower and the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles.

Afterward, Irvine Co. spokesman Charles Black said he thought the comments were generally positive. “It wasn't our objective to create a building that was flashy and yelled, 'Look at me!' ” Black said.

[sandiego_urban]

I know for a fact that Oliver Mcmillan is working on a proposal now to turn that storage unit into a hotel that is approx the height as the Office tower.
Any idea on who the hotel operator will be?


So then the proposed tower would have to be at least 501 feet
That's my understanding, but others have said that the tallest might refer to the number of floors in the building. It's confusing to me.


Here is the rendering of the proposed 47 Floor building...
http://www.sddt.com/images/news/2007/05/15/til_1270_columbia.jpg
This smaller rendering doesn't look THAT bad. It definitely looks taller than 500' and looks like something you'd see in Florida. Question is, do we want to look like Florida or Vancouver? I say neither. Let's wait and see to find out if this project is real or not. It also looks to be a variation of the Columbia Tower project on CW Kim's site.

I sent the developer an e-mail this morning asking about this project. I'll let you know if I get a response back.

Exactly. I don't think that site is very attractive for a luxury hotel. You are competing with the W. It doesn't have any water views and it is too far from the convention center. I see an upscale Holiday Inn, Ramada, Hampton Inn, etc.
Actually, the location isn't that bad. While it's not the best, according to mapquest, it's 2 blocks east of Sapphire Tower, and is also pretty close to Bayside (which will be the most expensive condo tower downtown when completed). I imagine the higher up units could have some nice views of the bay. It also isn't too far from the Lane Field development and the cruise ship terminal.

[spoonman]

BM Farley, Did you read the full article on the 47 story building in the SDDT? Did is seem as though the developer acknowledged the height limit? I think you are the only person with a subscription to the SDDT.

[sandiego_urban]

Here's the same article posted by gaucho above, except I've highlighted the quotes that really stick out. All of us here should be happy to see the gripes we've had here were also seen by the panel of "experts". :tup:



Navy Complex Projects Get Poor Marks

Public space drawings are called a first draft

By Jeanette Steele
STAFF WRITER

May 17, 2007

DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO – Two building projects at landmark downtown sites got poor or mixed reviews yesterday from the city's downtown redevelopment agency.

Public space at Manchester Financial's Navy Broadway Complex development was lambasted by agency board member Teddy Cruz, who called the design of the pedestrian promenade that bisects the site “cartoony” and “incredibly mediocre.”

Board member Kim John Kilkenny said it looks like a private-sector shopping mall, not a public plaza.

The second project, a planned skyscraper across the street, was described as elegant but not the icon that was expected.

Manchester was selected in April 2006 to develop the 15-acre Navy waterfront parcel at Harbor Drive and Pacific Highway. In addition to a Navy administration building – the design of which the board praised in the past – the developer plans to build a Class A office building, hotels, retail stores and a museum or cultural center.

It was the board's first look at renderings of the plaza, which will be the major public part of the development in addition to a block-sized park.

The company's designs are scheduled to go before the downtown agency for a final green light next month.

After the meeting, Manchester President Perry Dealy said the drawings are just a first draft.

“It was clear from their comments that they want us to put more effort into a more pedestrian storefront look, and we're working on that,” Dealy said. “We heard their comments.”

Meanwhile, the Irvine Co. appeared before the board for preliminary review of the 34-story office building that has been billed as a potential signature piece of the waterfront skyline. The site is at Broadway and Pacific Highway.

Drawings show a massive stone building with wide windows and a flared crown. Chicago's Monadnock Building was an inspiration for the look. Irvine has described it as a “dignified” edifice that will anchor that end of Broadway.

Some board members seemed to question whether the design, by renowned New York architect Henry Cobb, lives up to the hype.

“I'd be hard-pressed to take a look at the building there and say it is iconic in the way the Transamerica Building (in San Francisco) is iconic,” said Fred Maas, board chairman.

Santa Monica architect Gwynne Pugh, a member of the agency's guest design panel, said that because of the “restrained quality” of the design, it may be more of a background building than a standout.

But the board also praised Irvine for using high-quality materials, such as the natural stone travertine, and for choosing a world-class architect in Cobb. The 81-year-old designer is famous for designing Boston's John Hancock Tower and the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles.

Afterward, Irvine Co. spokesman Charles Black said he thought the comments were generally positive. “It wasn't our objective to create a building that was flashy and yelled, 'Look at me!' ” Black said.

[sandiegodweller]

Any idea on who the hotel operator will be?



That's my understanding, but others have said that the tallest might refer to the number of floors in the building. It's confusing to me.



This smaller rendering doesn't look THAT bad. It definitely looks taller than 500' and looks like something you'd see in Florida. Question is, do we want to look like Florida or Vancouver? I say neither. Let's wait and see to find out if this project is real or not. It also looks to be a variation of the Columbia Tower project on CW Kim's site.

I sent the developer an e-mail this morning asking about this project. I'll let you know if I get a response back.


Actually, the location isn't that bad. While it's not the best, according to mapquest, it's 2 blocks east of Sapphire Tower, and is also pretty close to Bayside (which will be the most expensive condo tower downtown when completed). I imagine the higher up units could have some nice views of the bay. It also isn't too far from the Lane Field development and the cruise ship terminal.

I am not considering all of the following properties as "LUXURY" but if I was proposing a LUXURY hotel in downtown San Diego right now, I would be concerned with the 1200 rooms already under construction at Campbell Shipyard (Hilton). This will satiate most of the convention crowds for awhile. I would also be wary of competing with the 2-3 hotels being proposed at NBC and Lane Field. Hard Rock (and maybe Diegan) will get the hip crowd who may be willing to pay up. We also have a few boutique hotels (Ivy, Keating) who are vying for that luxury dollar also. Mix in the already established Omni, Solamar, US Grant, W, Hyatt and Harbor Marriott (each with vastly superior locations to the waterfront and Gaslamp) and I think the Columbia Tower Group is missing the mark.

San Diego isn't San Francisco or NYC. The pool of luxury hotel guests runs shallow. The location of this new project is a 5 on a scale of 10.

[Derek]

What's the address of the site where the proposed 47 story will go?

[sandiegodweller]

What's the address of the site where the proposed 47 story will go?
1270 Columbia Street

[Derek]

Thanks! I thought it was more east, like 10th for some reason. :shrug:

[OCtoSD]

If you watch the 700 West Broadway video at the end he starts placing the building in the context of the city. He first puts in models of the Navy Broadway complex and of Lane Field. Then he shows a computer generated model. Right across the street in the model is a large square building. Maybe just something they are anticipating. I was wondering if anyone knows who owns that piece of property or any details. If anyone could get that screen shot and put it up on the board that would be awesome.

[Derek]

If I had to guess, I would say Bosa.

[spoonman]

^I don't know if Bosa owns that spot or not, but they were using it for staging during construction of Electra.

[eburress]

If you watch the 700 West Broadway video at the end he starts placing the building in the context of the city. He first puts in models of the Navy Broadway complex and of Lane Field. Then he shows a computer generated model. Right across the street in the model is a large square building. Maybe just something they are anticipating. I was wondering if anyone knows who owns that piece of property or any details. If anyone could get that screen shot and put it up on the board that would be awesome.

That is the "mystery" tower we've seen in so many renderings.

I grabbed some screenshots from 700 WB video, which I'll post tonight so we can ooh and ahhh.

:)

[SDCAL]

[QUOTE=mello;2839686]Things like this simply infuriate me :hell: How can people blindly say that "oh no lindbergh is fine for generations" Where is Jerry Sanders, where is the County Supervisor?? This is there damn job to get things like this figured out. QUOTE]


The San Diego County Board of Supervisors?? HA!! Not to get political, but that is the most WORTHLESS group of conservative political hacks in the entire state! They make the city council and mayor's office look progressive, well-organized, and innovative. I don't understand why we even HAVE "county supervisors". Screw the need for a new airprot, they are spending all their time on issues like taking medical marijuana away from dying people who need it to keep food down even though CA voters passed a MM bill. Sorry to get political, but they are truly the most worthless bunch of do-nothing politicians who typify the ppor leadership and backwards-thinking SD is known for. I think the mayor and city governments are slowly coming around to realizing what SD needs to become a great city, but don't look to the county supervisors for anything, their positions need to be eliminated :hell:

[SDCAL]

I am not considering all of the following properties as "LUXURY" but if I was proposing a LUXURY hotel in downtown San Diego right now, I would be concerned with the 1200 rooms already under construction at Campbell Shipyard (Hilton). This will satiate most of the convention crowds for awhile. I would also be wary of competing with the 2-3 hotels being proposed at NBC and Lane Field. Hard Rock (and maybe Diegan) will get the hip crowd who may be willing to pay up. We also have a few boutique hotels (Ivy, Keating) who are vying for that luxury dollar also. Mix in the already established Omni, Solamar, US Grant, W, Hyatt and Harbor Marriott (each with vastly superior locations to the waterfront and Gaslamp) and I think the Columbia Tower Group is missing the mark.

San Diego isn't San Francisco or NYC. The pool of luxury hotel guests runs shallow. The location of this new project is a 5 on a scale of 10.

sorry, don't mean to sound like a hotel snob, but the hotels you mentioned - Omni, Hyatt, etc., are very nice, but they are not 5 star luxury hotels and are a step down from the top-tier chains like Mandarin-Oriental, Four Seasons, Regent and Rtiz Carleton. yes we have some nationally-recognized small botique hotels like the US Grant which gets very good ratings nationally, but downtown SD has no LARGE luxury 5-star chain, and I think the downtown area has a market for at least one. You say we are not SF or NYC, obviously, they have many large 5-star hotels. We have a four seasons in north county (I believe Carlsbad), but i think SD needs an urban luxury maybe condotel downtown. My hope would be for a Mandarin-Oriental, they are truly amazing, especilly the ones in NYC and Bangkok

[SDCAL]

Here's the same article posted by gaucho above, except I've highlighted the quotes that really stick out. All of us here should be happy to see the gripes we've had here were also seen by the panel of "experts".

I completely agree with you. I think it is a positive sign that we are seeing some of these discussions appearing outside of this blog and in mainstream media. I have not seen this in San Diego in the past, and it shows that the media is finally understanding that citizens DO care how are city looks and want a quality, distinctive, innovative downtown. The more I think of the Cobb tower the more pissed I get. It's not that the building is not nice, I like it, I just feel like the architect is saying "It's San Diego, it's sleepy and conservative, so I am going to design something that is simple and fades into the background" I hope they decide to put that building on a different site and have this high-profile site re-designed by a different architect

[SDCAL]

I agree! That thing needs to go!:yuck:

hey I have a storage unit there, watch it hehehehe :cheers:

[sandiego_urban]

I am not considering all of the following properties as "LUXURY" but if I was proposing a LUXURY hotel in downtown San Diego right now, I would be concerned with the 1200 rooms already under construction at Campbell Shipyard (Hilton). This will satiate most of the convention crowds for awhile. I would also be wary of competing with the 2-3 hotels being proposed at NBC and Lane Field. Hard Rock (and maybe Diegan) will get the hip crowd who may be willing to pay up. We also have a few boutique hotels (Ivy, Keating) who are vying for that luxury dollar also. Mix in the already established Omni, Solamar, US Grant, W, Hyatt and Harbor Marriott (each with vastly superior locations to the waterfront and Gaslamp) and I think the Columbia Tower Group is missing the mark.

San Diego isn't San Francisco or NYC. The pool of luxury hotel guests runs shallow. The location of this new project is a 5 on a scale of 10.
I agree that downtown has no shortage of mid to mid-upper range hotels (Westin, Omni, Marriott, Radisson, Hilton, etc.), but I've read and heard that it is still underserved in the luxury area. While the Columbia proposal isn't in the best location, I'd love to see more hotels like that scattered around downtown instead of being concentrated like they are now on Harbor Drive and the Gaslamp. I'd say downtown's only real luxury hotel is the U.S Grant. The Diegan was suppose to announce their 5-Star hotel operator weeks ago, but hasn't yet. I'm thinking it may be Ritz-Carlton. What sucks is that almost all of our luxury properties (Lodge At Torrey Pines, Estancia, Four Seasons Aviara, La Costa, Grand Del Mar, The Del, etc.) are in the 'burbs. It's time to bring some downtown!

One thing I am excited about are all of the boutique and smaller brand hotels that are pooping up or being planned like The Sofia, The Ivy, The keating, Indigo, Aviana, Hard Rock, etc. :tup:




*************************************************************************




Bit articles regarding the 47-Story proposal from 2 sources (SD Daily Transcript and SD Metropolitan Magazine):



Land Parcel Sold For 47-story Mixed-use Project

By THOR KAMBAN BIBERMAN, The Daily Transcript
Tuesday, May 15, 2007

A 25,000-square-foot land parcel at 1270 Columbia St. in downtown San Diego is to become the site of a 47-story mixed-use development with multiple hotels, among other uses.

The project as planned is destined to be the tallest building in the region when completed. The property was purchased by Chhatrala Group, with offices on Rosecrans Street in the Point Loma area. The seller was Bay Structures LLC, c/o Alger Development of Tacoma, Wash. The transaction was handled by Tim Winslow, Josh Vasbinder and Jason Kimmel of Grubb & Ellis|BRE Commercial.



San Diego Metropolitan Magazine
Daily Report
5/15/07

The Chhatrala Group has purchased 25,000 square feet of property at 1270 Columbia St. for $10.1 million to build a 47-story hotel project. The development will incorporate multiple hotels and will be the tallest building Downtown. The seller was Bay Structures. Tim Winslow, Josh Vasbinder and Jason Kimmel of Grubb & Ellis|BRE Commercial handled the transaction.



Let's just wait and see.........:shrug:

[sandiego_urban]

sorry, don't mean to sound like a hotel snob, but the hotels you mentioned - Omni, Hyatt, etc., are very nice, but they are not 5 star luxury hotels and are a step down from the top-tier chains like Mandarin-Oriental, Four Seasons, Regent and Rtiz Carleton.
There's been talk of a Regent at Horton Plaza, Ritz Carlton at Lane Field and Harbor Drive, and Mandarin Oriental at La Jolla Commons. I'll take anyone of these, thank you very much. St. Regis and Trump International would be cool, too. ;)



****************************************************************************


From yesterday's SD Metro's Daily Report -


When Perry Dealy mentioned yesterday a Little Italy developer had secured a letter of intent from Whole Foods to open a store in Little Italy, CCDC’s Nancy Graham had to jump in. “Everyone has a letter of intent from Whole Foods,” she said. “We are taking bets in the office (on which one will actually happen.)”

[spoonman]

I'd really like to see the full article on the 47 floor tower that was in the SDDT if any of you have access.

About Whole Foods...I love that store and think that it would be great to have one closer to downtown than Hillcrest. I think that the prospect of opening one in Little Italy is great as long as it doesn't impact the small groceries in that neighborhood.

[SDCAL]

I'd really like to see the full article on the 47 floor tower that was in the SDDT if any of you have access.

About Whole Foods...I love that store and think that it would be great to have one closer to downtown than Hillcrest. I think that the prospect of opening one in Little Italy is great as long as it doesn't impact the small groceries in that neighborhood.

We really do need a Whole Foods downtown, I would like to see on in East Village too. The downside is that Whole Foods is pricey, and I think downtown (hopefully East Village) could really bennefit from a Trader Joe's and/or a Henry's. I prefer these to the large Albertson's/Ralph's chains and do drive from downtown up to Hillcrest just to go grocery shopping.

A couple months ago I went to all three websites - Henry's(Wild oats), whole foods as well as Trader Joe's and submitted the suggestion on their websites (they have areas for submitting store location suggestions)> If anyone else downtown agrees we need these stores, I suggest doing the same ;)

[SDCAL]

I'd really like to see the full article on the 47 floor tower that was in the SDDT if any of you have access.

About Whole Foods...I love that store and think that it would be great to have one closer to downtown than Hillcrest. I think that the prospect of opening one in Little Italy is great as long as it doesn't impact the small groceries in that neighborhood.

me too, I tried and they charge to subscribe to the site, but i figure if we have a proposal for something over 500 ft it would show up in multiple news publications

[SDCAL]

Mandarin-Oriental Hotel

I have seen several posts over the past 4 months linking Mandarin-Oriental and La Jolla Commons -Where are people getting this information??????

I have done every search possible for Mandarin-Oriental and the La Jolla Commons site and have found not one credible item indicating this is/was ever the case. All I find are blogs like this one where people are saying that's what might go in there :) Would like to know if there is some source of finding this kind of information that I don't know about, because I'd like to be able to research it :)

Mandarin-Oriental website has future hotel planned through 2010 and San Diego is not listed
La Jolla Commons site and press releases say nothing indicating Mandarin-Oriental is or was ever being considered
I hope it happens though, it is a really great hotel chain

[SDDTProspector]

An Old blogger named scottb used to imform us on all the happening of d-town. Professsionally he is an illustarator, he does some work for some SD projects...

Here is his website;

http://www.baumbergerstudio.com/

There are couple of newer san diego projects that I don't know of....

McMillan Tower and Wonder Bread for example

check it out......


Also check this out.... I found the FAA regulations for Limberg field...

http://www.airport-data.com/airport/SAN/

It claims TERRAIN & BLDGS TO 500' MSL N & E WITHIN 1 1/2 MI.

Now... I would imagine that east village is 1 mile and 1/2 away!!!!:tup:

[SDCAL]

Cool site - he must have inside info, wish he would start posting on here again so we can get the scoop on what's planning on going where :)

There is a rendering of the Indigo Hotel planned for the East Village - - CCDC lists this project but doesn't include the rendering

[sandiego_urban]

I'd really like to see the full article on the 47 floor tower that was in the SDDT if any of you have access.
I believe what I posted was the full article. My other office gets the paper edition of the Transcript so I'll try to look for it when I'm there again, but it looks to me like it was just a "sidebar" article. I'm sure if the proposal is legit, there will be more news about it soon.


We really do need a Whole Foods downtown, I would like to see on in East Village too. The downside is that Whole Foods is pricey, and I think downtown (hopefully East Village) could really bennefit from a Trader Joe's and/or a Henry's. I prefer these to the large Albertson's/Ralph's chains and do drive from downtown up to Hillcrest just to go grocery shopping.
There have been rumors of Whole Foods and Trader Joe's coming to downtown for awhile now. I think downtown has the ideal demographics for a Whole Foods Market and a Trader Joe's. Not only would it be closer to the people in Coronado, but it would help take some pressure off the always crowded stores in Hillcrest. Tesco is entering the market with their Fresh & Easy http://www.freshandeasy.com/ stores to compete with Trader Joe's. They are planning 30 stores in SD County alone and I'm sure they have one planned for downtown.

Downtown already has Ralph's, Albertson's and Smart & Final, so I'm wondering if having a Whole Foods, Trader Joe's and Tesco would be overkill?

I have seen several posts over the past 4 months linking Mandarin-Oriental and La Jolla Commons -Where are people getting this information??????
Here's the link to the article that mentions the Mandarin Oriental that was posted in Feb. 2006. I believe there was a similar article in the U-T printed around the same time.

http://www.sdnews.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2006/02/23/43fe58a4d2d08?in_archive=1

[sandiego_urban]

Also check this out.... I found the FAA regulations for Limberg field...

http://www.airport-data.com/airport/SAN/

It claims TERRAIN & BLDGS TO 500' MSL N & E WITHIN 1 1/2 MI.

Now... I would imagine that east village is 1 mile and 1/2 away!!!!:tup:
East Village is most certainly more than 1.5 miles away from the airport. So who among us, will point this out to CCDC and the developers? ;)

[Derek]

It claims TERRAIN & BLDGS TO 500' MSL N & E WITHIN 1 1/2 MI.

Now... I would imagine that east village is 1 mile and 1/2 away!!!!:tup:

Too bad everybody fails to see this.:shrug:

[Derek]

An Old blogger named scottb used to imform us on all the happening of d-town. Professsionally he is an illustarator, he does some work for some SD projects...

Here is his website;

http://www.baumbergerstudio.com/

He's also got renderings for the old police headquarters near Seaport Village.

Edit: This guy has a ton of renderings I've never seen! :tup:

[Derek]

List of projects we haven't seen from http://www.baumbergerstudio.com/:

St. Paul's (near the St. Paul's church in Little Italy)
777 Beech Street (look incredible in my opinion:))
Katalyst
Mondrian (the backside...wish i could post images from that for you guys)
McMillan Tower
Mercado
G Lofts East
Old Police Headquarters (looks pretty nice)
Pacific Gateway (a nice NBC rendering)
Wonder Bread (im assuming this will be in the East Village where the current Wonder Bread factory building is...)
Hotel Indigo
Laundry Lofts (different renderings)
Monarch School (different rendering)

[Crackertastik]

Anyone have any idea if it is alright to post all his pics on here? I have all the pictures, of good quality, that i can post. Im not sure if 1. he/she will get pissed, and 2. if it is illegal.

[Derek]

^It should be fine, as long as you credit him.

[bmfarley]

In attempting to locate the legal mumbo jumbo about the downtown height limit I came across an interesting info. Provided on the FAA site is the determination or findings of developers proposing to build stuff near airports. One building caught my eye... one which may have seemed dead. Maybe?

Ghods Builders filed papers as recently as Thursday to build the Monaco Condominiums located on Broadway between 8th & 9th. The application indicates construction would occur between April 1st 2008 and completed in late 2009. The height is 435 feet with an initial elevation of 65 feet. The mean height above sea level would be 500.

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=518452

[Derek]

Good find!

[keg92101]

We really do need a Whole Foods downtown, I would like to see on in East Village too. The downside is that Whole Foods is pricey, and I think downtown (hopefully East Village) could really bennefit from a Trader Joe's and/or a Henry's. I prefer these to the large Albertson's/Ralph's chains and do drive from downtown up to Hillcrest just to go grocery shopping.

A couple months ago I went to all three websites - Henry's(Wild oats), whole foods as well as Trader Joe's and submitted the suggestion on their websites (they have areas for submitting store location suggestions)> If anyone else downtown agrees we need these stores, I suggest doing the same ;)

As Trader Joes was opening in Pt. Loma, I would drop in and talk with the General & Regional Mgrs about this, and they told me that corporate wants to open one downtown, they just need to find the space (8,000-10,000 SF) The real problem is that developers can get over $3 per SF for retail space if they are smaller, them MOST TJs is going to pay is $2, since it is an anchor/specialty draw. Anyway, the guy always told me that if you know of a space, let him know and he would pass it up the ladder.

[Derek]

Speaking of places that sell food and what not; What's with the 7-11 boom?

[spoonman]

According to 7/11, there are currently 7 stores in what is considered "downtown"...

[Marina_Guy]

As Trader Joes was opening in Pt. Loma, I would drop in and talk with the General & Regional Mgrs about this, and they told me that corporate wants to open one downtown, they just need to find the space (8,000-10,000 SF) The real problem is that developers can get over $3 per SF for retail space if they are smaller, them MOST TJs is going to pay is $2, since it is an anchor/specialty draw. Anyway, the guy always told me that if you know of a space, let him know and he would pass it up the ladder.

To me this is the most challenging part of downtown right now, Retail! There is so much vacant space and, one would have to have guess that the rents are out of line with business models. For downtown to grow and prosper, and become more of a 'neighborhood' retail rents have to fall/correct.

I applaud CCDC for requiring ground floor retail, but I think it might become neccessary for CCDC to require developers to subsidize retail rents to encourage growth. I think Seattle and Portland have programs like this. Just requiring it (retail) doesn't make it happen.

I also understand that a critical mass of residents and workers are necessary for any retail to succeed as well. I have heard a statistics that it takes 1600 people per urban city block to make retail successful. I don't think our current densities offer this. Any one have any info on that?

As far as Trader Joe's is considered their business model is driven by LOW RENT. They do not pay market rents in most of their markets. I think a savvy downtown commercial investor might consider offering them some space in conjunction with a larger commercial project to 'get it going'. I am sure if the price is right, Trader Joes would be in Downtown.

I notice a lot of the older buildings are starting to get retail (Along 9th/10th Ave near Market and G... That is nice to see.

Any thoughts?