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)

embora Jun 14, 2015 6:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 7062216)
Isn't the Broadway project between 7th and 8th? The beer co is on 6th and Broadway I don't think the article was correct.
Pinnacle is doing 11th and Broadway and ive heard they won't start on that until they finish phase 2 on 15 and island.
The hotel Churchill project is under construction now. I guess they "found" 6 million more dollars to renovate it.

Do you know if Phase 1 of 15th & Island is complete? I've seen lights on in some of the units on lower floors, and I they've got signs up for leasing, so I think it's got to at least be pretty close to being completed. http://www.pinnacleonthepark.com/

mello Jun 14, 2015 8:46 PM

Are you kidding me Pinnacle is going to wait on 11th and Broadway until they finish tower 2 at Island... Come on, demand is huge they can do two projects at once they are a major builder not some small operation. Also walked by that Karkas (Sp?) supply store at 9/10th and G, that things needs to go ASAP.

On another point I do agree with Dales that it isn't just empty lots we should be looking at for development there are tons of crappy underused structures in downtown even some really dinky residential projects built 12 years ago on 7th and 8th could be torn down for larger developments in years to come. Family gym in East Village, shitty car services places in Columbia district just outside Little Itay etc. Persian restaurant on 5th or 6th with cab company across the street in an old gas station/service structure etc.... When you take the time to really walk the streets and see what is around there is a lot of potential dev. sites.

dtell04 Jun 15, 2015 2:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by embora (Post 7062465)
Do you know if Phase 1 of 15th & Island is complete? I've seen lights on in some of the units on lower floors, and I they've got signs up for leasing, so I think it's got to at least be pretty close to being completed. http://www.pinnacleonthepark.com/

The crane came down a couple weeks ago. A few floors still are missing the windows where the construction elevator was attached. I heard Stella and halcyon aren't paying rent because the developer told them they'd be done by now. There's a few units that have lights left on at night.
I can see why they wouldn't do 2 projects at once. They probably use the same subcontractors for everything.

embora Jun 16, 2015 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 7062810)
The crane came down a couple weeks ago. A few floors still are missing the windows where the construction elevator was attached. I heard Stella and halcyon aren't paying rent because the developer told them they'd be done by now. There's a few units that have lights left on at night.
I can see why they wouldn't do 2 projects at once. They probably use the same subcontractors for everything.

Not to mention the issue of cash flow. It's gotta help to have proceeds from one investment coming in before they take the risk of building the next project.

SDCAL Jun 16, 2015 6:17 PM

below is information from the San Diego Eater regarding the proposed grocer in the 7th and Market Development:

From: http://sandiego.eater.com


The tipline is buzzing about a potential new Whole Foods Market that might land in the East Village as part of a mixed-use project that has been proposed for the downtown block at Seventh and Market Street bordered by Eighth and Island Avenues.

Jason Wood, a principal at Cisterra Development, told Eater that Whole Foods Market is indeed attached to their proposal for the site, which would also include a Ritz Carlton and two restaurants linked to the hotel, plus new apartments and office space. It's not yet clear if the grocer would be opening a traditional Whole Foods in the space or one of its new, lower-priced 365 by Whole Foods outlets. Whole Foods Market could not confirm the expansion, but said it will be announcing new store sites during a quarterly earnings call scheduled for July.

bobbyv Jun 17, 2015 3:44 AM

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sports...616-story.html:slob:

Bertrice Jun 17, 2015 4:24 AM

Car Rental Center topped out
http://www.cbs8.com/story/29338015/s...tal-car-center

http://kfmb.images.worldnow.com/images/8085854_G.jpg

http://kusi.images.worldnow.com/images/8084491_G.jpg

dales5050 Jun 17, 2015 7:59 PM

Chargers nix Dec. 15 stadium vote
 
Welp....this pretty much clears up the picture as to the future of the Chargers in San Diego.

For those who did not want a penny to be spent on the stadium...you'll get your wish.

You'll also get a bus garage for the next 20 years in the East Village and the maintenance bill for the Q without the revenue from the Chargers. Good luck redeveloping that massive site with just the SDSU football team attached.

:cheers:

dtell04 Jun 17, 2015 8:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dales5050 (Post 7065979)
Welp....this pretty much clears up the picture as to the future of the Chargers in San Diego.

For those who did not want a penny to be spent on the stadium...you'll get your wish.

You'll also get a bus garage for the next 20 years in the East Village and the maintenance bill for the Q without the revenue from the Chargers. Good luck redeveloping that massive site with just the SDSU football team attached.

:cheers:

I'd say it's obvious the Chargers don't want to stay.

Crackertastik Jun 17, 2015 8:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 7065982)
I'd say it's obvious the Chargers don't want to stay.

Very obvious.

Why are the Chargers so insistent on a ballot vote when a solution which avoids one is presented to them?

Someone answer me that. Do they really think the threat of legal action dies with a YES vote?

This is the end.

dales5050 Jun 17, 2015 9:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 7065982)
I'd say it's obvious the Chargers don't want to stay.

If you were the owner...would you want to stay? I wouldn't.

dtell04 Jun 17, 2015 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dales5050 (Post 7066106)
If you were the owner...would you want to stay? I wouldn't.

I would never want to move to LA. He will be the third fiddle to the raiders and Rams regardless of where those teams play. The only way Spanos truly realizes the value of moving to LA is by selling the team. It would seem like there's a fair deal to be had with the csag proposal, but to get around the environmental survey they would have to go the route of Carson or inglewood. That would require a June vote.
So it seems like if the Chargers want a new stadium in SD they simply have to say OK and wait until a June vote. The relocation fee alone might be close to 300 million dollars. Maybe they're gearing up to sell the team after they move it to LA.
It seems odd to me that an environmental review isn't necessary because the average voter is not informed enough to know any better. I think if that environmental law ever had a legitimate purpose it would be to make sure you mitigate the risks for a project like, say, building a huge people holding structure on an old landfill. But it's not ok to replace a stadium on the site of an existing stadium. Oh that's right. This is California.

Bertrice Jun 17, 2015 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackertastik (Post 7066022)
Very obvious.

Why are the Chargers so insistent on a ballot vote when a solution which avoids one is presented to them?

Someone answer me that. Do they really think the threat of legal action dies with a YES vote?

This is the end.

I believe Faulconer wanted the vote for political coverage but I don't think Chargers insisted either way.
Voice of San Diego sued the city of Carson to get access to documents they believe exists showing the Chargers started working with Carson a year before they said

dtell04 Jun 17, 2015 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bertrice (Post 7066186)
I believe Faulconer wanted the vote for political coverage but I don't think Chargers insisted either way.
Voice of San Diego sued the city of Carson to get access to documents they believe exists showing the Chargers started working with Carson a year before they said

If the city council simply approved the plan it would go the way of one paseo or barrio Logan and end up on the ballot anyway. That's why faulconer insists on a vote, because it's inevitable.

Crackertastik Jun 17, 2015 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 7066200)
If the city council simply approved the plan it would go the way of one paseo or barrio Logan and end up on the ballot anyway. That's why faulconer insists on a vote, because it's inevitable.

I may be in the minority but I feel like we shouldn't get to vote on whatever we want just because we get signatures. Let the representatives we elect do their job. California's version of government is so overwrought with inefficiency stemming from the "too many hands in the pot". We have a built in second-guessing mechanism. The classic micro-manager syndrome.

SDfan Jun 18, 2015 2:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dales5050 (Post 7065979)
Welp....this pretty much clears up the picture as to the future of the Chargers in San Diego.

For those who did not want a penny to be spent on the stadium...you'll get your wish.

You'll also get a bus garage for the next 20 years in the East Village and the maintenance bill for the Q without the revenue from the Chargers. Good luck redeveloping that massive site with just the SDSU football team attached.

:cheers:

:cheers:

SDfan Jun 18, 2015 2:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackertastik (Post 7066299)
I may be in the minority but I feel like we shouldn't get to vote on whatever we want just because we get signatures. Let the representatives we elect do their job. California's version of government is so overwrought with inefficiency stemming from the "too many hands in the pot". We have a built in second-guessing mechanism. The classic micro-manager syndrome.

Agreed.

SDCAL Jun 18, 2015 5:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackertastik (Post 7066299)
I may be in the minority but I feel like we shouldn't get to vote on whatever we want just because we get signatures. Let the representatives we elect do their job. California's version of government is so overwrought with inefficiency stemming from the "too many hands in the pot". We have a built in second-guessing mechanism. The classic micro-manager syndrome.

I agree with this. I believe Todd Gloria, city councilman, was advocating making the threshold for these ballot initiatives higher but not sure if it's going anywhere. As it is, any major decision the city makes gets overturned by special interests who can afford to pay liars to collect signatures. Whether it's Barrio Logan, 1 Paseo, even the minimum wage increase, it seems like any time the city makes a major decision it gets derailed. If the city were to proceed with a new stadium without a vote, I can guarantee you a group would soon be out getting signatures to force it on the ballot.

Nerv Jun 18, 2015 5:57 AM

Regardless of how you feel about the Chargers staying or leaving the one thing I'm not looking forward to is the fight over the next decade about Qualcomm stadium's fate.

You can dream all you want about San Diego State getting a piece of it but I'll say right now that once the Chargers do leave the fight for the Q and how it will be used or not is going to be something fierce.

If San Diego State or anyone else with plans for that site thinks they can just easily move in and take it without a extremely long drawn out fight they are in for a rude surprise. If the poles are low for getting the Chargers a new stadium imagine giving away a large valuable piece of city land to the Aztecs. :haha:

I thought all along that if the Chargers leave the Q would turn out to be a giant paperweight with everyone in the city fighting for what to do with it.

Forget about any perceived shame by the city for losing a NFL team. Get ready for another long, sad chapter in San Diego history as we get ready for the battle for the Q...

Nerv Jun 18, 2015 6:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackertastik (Post 7066299)
I may be in the minority but I feel like we shouldn't get to vote on whatever we want just because we get signatures. Let the representatives we elect do their job. California's version of government is so overwrought with inefficiency stemming from the "too many hands in the pot". We have a built in second-guessing mechanism. The classic micro-manager syndrome.


Excellent point. If everything is going to be voted on why do we bother to elect anyone? Isn't that why I voted someone into office in the first place? To actually make some decisions?


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:11 PM.

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