SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   City Compilations (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=87)
-   -   SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2 (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=126473)

SDfan Sep 10, 2020 4:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanatty (Post 9037197)
Whatever the plan is - it will require a tax passed by 2/3rd’s under state law. A lot of trains and no freeways - state climate law or not - simply won’t get the votes (after broken promises re freeways through past tax measures)... while the courts can invalidate SANDAG’s plans... they lack the power to impose a funding mechanism over the voter’s rejection. Any plan must start with the goal of securing 2/3rd county voter approval for the underlying funding mechanism or it’s all for naught, isn’t it?

2/3rds is a high threshold. Let's see if the state keeps it at 2/3rds...

sanatty Sep 10, 2020 7:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDfan (Post 9037652)
2/3rds is a high threshold. Let's see if the state keeps it at 2/3rds...

it's up to the voters, not the state, as the 2/3rds threshold is part of the constitution of California.

proposition 13 (passed in 1978) includes a requirement of 2/3rd's majority voter approval for any increase in special taxes (i.e., non-general fund taxes).

the current proposed changes to prop. 13 - labeled proposition 15 - doesn't touch the 2/3rd's requirement and only attempts to alter the method of property tax assessments for commercial properties (recall prop. 13 also caps property tax increases to 1% annually).

the problems are not NIMBYS - they are un-creative politicians and planners that can't successfully market targeted, popular transportation plans (and their associated funding mechanism) to 2/3rds majorities of voters.

pretending that the rules don't apply to "own the NIMBYS" is silly and leads to zero progress.

SDfan Sep 10, 2020 9:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanatty (Post 9037926)
it's up to the voters, not the state, as the 2/3rds threshold is part of the constitution of California.

proposition 13 (passed in 1978) includes a requirement of 2/3rd's majority voter approval for any increase in special taxes (i.e., non-general fund taxes).

the current proposed changes to prop. 13 - labeled proposition 15 - doesn't touch the 2/3rd's requirement and only attempts to alter the method of property tax assessments for commercial properties (recall prop. 13 also caps property tax increases to 1% annually).

the problems are not NIMBYS - they are un-creative politicians and planners that can't successfully market targeted, popular transportation plans (and their associated funding mechanism) to 2/3rds majorities of voters.

pretending that the rules don't apply to "own the NIMBYS" is silly and leads to zero progress.

We'll see.

sanatty Sep 10, 2020 9:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDfan (Post 9038084)
We'll see.

At some point, the rubber has to hit the road. SANDAG relies on (in addition to the state and mainly federal transpo funding MPO's like SANDAG were set up/required to be set up to administer) TransNet funding which *generously* would raise $18.8 billion during the life of that program's 40-year extension (to 2048). Ikhrata has proposed a $177 billion plan. At it's best, SANDAG has leveraged $3 from state and federal sources for every $1 in TransNet funding. This implies $56.4 billion in state and federal funding to match the $18.8 billion raised by TransNet. That's $75.2 billion total through 2048. Over $100 billion short of the plan's estimated cost. Even if SANDAG could secure passage of a new funding mechanism (they'd need a 2/3rds majority - for certain not "we'll see"), they'd need to raise an additional $25 billion (if we anticipate an additional $3/$1 federal and state matching dollars).

You keep arguing that this is what we need - Ikhrata's plan - but have no idea or plan to GET THERE.

Pie in the sky dreaming is fun, but we are at the rubber meets the road phase and Ikhrata is still day dreaming.

Will O' Wisp Sep 10, 2020 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDfan (Post 9037651)
Do you recall what happened in the in-between time when the Navy transferred Miramar to the Marines? I thought that was the big opportunity that SD had to claim the airport.

There was no in-between time. On October 1st, 1997 Miramar was transferred directly from the Navy to the Marines. They even had a ceremony where the Navy commanding officer handed over control to the incoming Marine commander.

So what happened was, in the late 80s-early 90s it started becoming clear TOP GUN would be leaving San Diego. The Navy had outgrown Miramar years before, forcing them to transfer a good deal of training to NAS Fallon. It made sense to centralize. At this time the city made it clear that if the military didn't need it anymore, they would be very, very interested in acquiring it for their new airport. To the point of calling up our congressional representation and asking them to get Miramar closed.

The Navy resisted, saying that while the bulk of their training would be shifting to Fallon they still needed Miramar. The Navy does most of their large scale ocean exercises of the coast of San Diego, every other military airbase would be too small or to far away to allow aircraft to fly in support of this training.

The city and the Navy were still arguing about it when in 1993 congress announced El Toro would be closed and the Marines would be coming to Miramar. Made perfect sense from a military perspective, being surrounded by mountains El Toro was a nightmare to fly into and the Navy could still conduct their offshore training with the Marines there. Came as quite a shock to some people in the city though, who thought they were making progress towards convincing the Navy to leave. But realistically, it was probably never in the cards.

mongoXZ Sep 10, 2020 11:59 PM

Hello everyone, it's been ages since I've been here.:tup:

Honestly didn't know this forum still existed. Why are we still in Boom Rundown 2?

How bout them Padres?:D

SDfan Sep 11, 2020 1:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp (Post 9038157)
There was no in-between time. On October 1st, 1997 Miramar was transferred directly from the Navy to the Marines. They even had a ceremony where the Navy commanding officer handed over control to the incoming Marine commander.

So what happened was, in the late 80s-early 90s it started becoming clear TOP GUN would be leaving San Diego. The Navy had outgrown Miramar years before, forcing them to transfer a good deal of training to NAS Fallon. It made sense to centralize. At this time the city made it clear that if the military didn't need it anymore, they would be very, very interested in acquiring it for their new airport. To the point of calling up our congressional representation and asking them to get Miramar closed.

The Navy resisted, saying that while the bulk of their training would be shifting to Fallon they still needed Miramar. The Navy does most of their large scale ocean exercises of the coast of San Diego, every other military airbase would be too small or to far away to allow aircraft to fly in support of this training.

The city and the Navy were still arguing about it when in 1993 congress announced El Toro would be closed and the Marines would be coming to Miramar. Made perfect sense from a military perspective, being surrounded by mountains El Toro was a nightmare to fly into and the Navy could still conduct their offshore training with the Marines there. Came as quite a shock to some people in the city though, who thought they were making progress towards convincing the Navy to leave. But realistically, it was probably never in the cards.

Thanks for this!

roletand Sep 11, 2020 1:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanatty (Post 9037926)
it's up to the voters, not the state, as the 2/3rds threshold is part of the constitution of California.

proposition 13 (passed in 1978) includes a requirement of 2/3rd's majority voter approval for any increase in special taxes (i.e., non-general fund taxes).

the current proposed changes to prop. 13 - labeled proposition 15 - doesn't touch the 2/3rd's requirement and only attempts to alter the method of property tax assessments for commercial properties (recall prop. 13 also caps property tax increases to 1% annually).

the problems are not NIMBYS - they are un-creative politicians and planners that can't successfully market targeted, popular transportation plans (and their associated funding mechanism) to 2/3rds majorities of voters.

pretending that the rules don't apply to "own the NIMBYS" is silly and leads to zero progress.

It looks like 2/3rds might not be the threshold anymore. TBD

Quote:

Title: Editorial: California Supreme Court ruling has huge implications for San Diego
By: THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE EDITORIAL BOARD
Published in: The San Diego Union-Tribune
SEP. 10, 2020 4:48 PM

The California Supreme Court this week declined to hear a challenge to a 2018 San Francisco ballot measure — approved with majority but less than two-thirds support — that imposed a new tax on large companies to pay for homelessness programs, in sync with its 2017 decision drawing a distinction between tax-hike ballot measures qualified by public signature-gathering and those placed before voters by elected officials.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...homeless-roads

Will O' Wisp Sep 11, 2020 5:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roletand (Post 9038367)
It looks like 2/3rds might not be the threshold anymore. TBD

https://memepedia.ru/wp-content/uplo...-3-768x409.jpg

dirt patch Sep 11, 2020 5:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 9037192)
IS RETAIL DOWNTOWN DEAD?

So, the last remaining tenant of Horton Plaza closed. Jimbos Horton Plaza has only a few days left.

They are in the middle of a construction zone so I guess it shouldn’t be surprising, but there seems to be a really depressing void in downtown lately.

I know some of this is related to COVID-19, but I have to wonder what plans there are (if any) for the future of retail downtown.

There’s literally nothing left. It’s just restaurants and condos. Over the years I know there’s been proposals that have floated about putting a Target or Home Depot or other similar things, but it seems like they’ve all died.

I’m not sure what will be in the ground level of the Horton Plaza redevelopment, they are extremely vague about it.

I think there was supposed to be high end retail at Manchester’s Pacific Gateway and that crashed and burned.

Is there just not enough people living down here for retail? Horton Plaza did good for awhile, so I’m having trouble understand why this is such a huge void downtown.

Yep, retail is severly toast with very few exceptions: several in Gaslamp and Little Italy. Pretty much it. Downtown needs 40,000 more people in the downtown core for retail to pencil out.

sanatty Sep 11, 2020 7:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roletand (Post 9038367)
It looks like 2/3rds might not be the threshold anymore. TBD

This is not news, and the reduced majority threshold applies to "tax hike ballot measures qualified by public signature-gathering" NOT those placed on a ballot by a public agency such as SANDAG.

All prior SANDAG measures (check to confirm re most recent measure A, 2016) are drafted by SANDAG and placed on the ballot by SANDAG.

Query whether SANDAG can get around this by having a group of citizens draft the measure - and you run SMACK into the issue encountered by the City of San Diego in having the Mayor (Sanders) coordinate with a "citizens" committee to get Measure B on the ballot in 2012. The level of coordination b/w SANDAG and any citizens group would convert the tax measure into one "placed on the ballot by a public agency".

sanatty Sep 11, 2020 8:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp (Post 9038519)

As said above, this is for "citizens initiatives" like (ref'd in the cited article) the convention center and homeless initiative. Please get back to me on which MPO's have had tax measures passed via citizens initiative in CA...

mello Sep 12, 2020 7:44 PM

Concerning transit expansion do you guys feel like some of it may hinge on how the ridership does on this new extension to UTC? If its heavily used might it convince some in the county to be cool with kicking in more funds for other lines/projects? However, if the new line is a dud and economy languishes I don't see citizens going for further tax increases.

Construction update, lot at Ash St and Front/Union is cleared with a Swinerton Co fencing all around it. Which project is this?

Streetlights 15th/F still no earth moving equipment just a cleared lot anyone have any updates?

* Also Navy HQ at Manchester development will be done in a couple of weeks, what can we expect next? Demo of the old buildings and construction on the tall hotel portion and office building on the North side of the site? Is he still going forward with that North portion and the big Biotech guy is developing the South side --

roletand Sep 13, 2020 1:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 9039905)
Concerning transit expansion do you guys feel like some of it may hinge on how the ridership does on this new extension to UTC? If its heavily used might it convince some in the county to be cool with kicking in more funds for other lines/projects? However, if the new line is a dud and economy languishes I don't see citizens going for further tax increases.

Construction update, lot at Ash St and Front/Union is cleared with a Swinerton Co fencing all around it. Which project is this?

Streetlights 15th/F still no earth moving equipment just a cleared lot anyone have any updates?

* Also Navy HQ at Manchester development will be done in a couple of weeks, what can we expect next? Demo of the old buildings and construction on the tall hotel portion and office building on the North side of the site? Is he still going forward with that North portion and the big Biotech guy is developing the South side --

Construction at Ash & Union is Alexan Little Italy

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...218-story.html

Steadfast Sep 13, 2020 2:12 AM

Deleted post.

HurricaneHugo Sep 18, 2020 4:11 AM

Does anybody know what's going up on Ohio St and Monroe?

A block is cleared and steel bars are up

mello Sep 18, 2020 7:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneHugo (Post 9045523)
Does anybody know what's going up on Ohio St and Monroe?

A block is cleared and steel bars are up

That was a super Old Skool apartment complex. In fact may have been one of the largest early to late 40's complexes in SD. I can't think of another that may have had more units of acreage. I doubt it was from the 30's was probably built to quickly house returning military personnel.

Anyhow they demoed it and its gunna be a dope modern project. Not sure how many units never saw any renders.

Speaking of large projects in that area I really hope the Park Blvd at beginning of EC Blvd project gets going soon. Lot is cleared for almost six months now with construction fencing and nada :shrug:

Streamliner Sep 18, 2020 8:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 9046338)
That was a super Old Skool apartment complex. In fact may have been one of the largest early to late 40's complexes in SD. I can't think of another that may have had more units of acreage. I doubt it was from the 30's was probably built to quickly house returning military personnel.

Anyhow they demoed it and its gunna be a dope modern project. Not sure how many units never saw any renders.

Speaking of large projects in that area I really hope the Park Blvd at beginning of EC Blvd project gets going soon. Lot is cleared for almost six months now with construction fencing and nada :shrug:

Is this it? Couldn't find much, but it seems to match:

https://www.suffolk.com/projects/4469-ohio-street

150 units, 5 stories

Streamliner Sep 23, 2020 4:47 PM

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...cused-proposal

Brookfield loses out on the Tailgate Park site.

HurricaneHugo Sep 25, 2020 7:11 AM

The strip mall next to UTC is getting a makeover:

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...w-trolley-line


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.