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)

SDCAL Jul 27, 2007 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 2975912)
Of course those trees could grow here, this isn't Phoenix. Do those trees need to freeze in order to live???

The point was that it would be nice to have a square that encouraged stopping, and strolling and provided shade as opposed to the desolate lawns we refer to as parks, which have non-indegenous palms that provide no shade in a city that could actually use it.

it doesn't have to do with freezing (although some do only ;ive in areas where there is a freeze), has to do with ground moisture

annual rainfall:

San Diego 10 inches
Phoenix 7 inches
Washington DC 42 inches
New York 43 inches

Our climate is more similar to Phoenix than it is to the Eastern Seaboard where you see these gigantic mature deciduous trees.

Our air humidity might be a little higher in sd than phx due to the ocean, but our ground precip is similar. I used to live in Arizona, and they get the occasional winter storm like sd does, but they also get the summer "monsoon" going on now that brings thunderstorms, which we don't get here, so overall our rainfall is similar (this year our rainfall is actually below what theirs is)

And those types of trees, even if they could survive here, they would not thrive or become that large. have you been to the east coast and seen the trees, for example in New York? The are HUGE, the only trees that I have seen that grow that large here are the eucalyptus trees that have a totally different look but are able to live in the drier climate.

Even if you compare warmer east coast areas to SD, certain things can't live here. Coconut palms are a good example, thrive in Florida, die if you plant them here

Alot of the trees which you see in places like Washington DC's parks are temperate flowering fruits that only survive in that climate, such as the famous cherry trees that blossom in Spring. I was talking to people at the Japanese friendship garden in Balboa Park who said there are cherry trees that have been engineered to grow here but they don't get as big.

Even the deciduous trees that grow along the river in SD that someone brought up are nowhere near as big as those you see on the East Coast or in the midwest.

I do agree our parks could use denser foliage and shade as you mention, I just don't think those types of trees would grow that large here and even if they could it takes decades to reach that maturity. SD is a new city compared to East Coast, alot of those trees have had decades to mature

I am surprised that nobody here ever mentions Balboa Park - -it's not right downtown but it's close and I think it's amazing and it is certainly on the same grandeur as the famous parks of cities back east, even central Park, partly becuase it doesn't try to mimic them and it is unique to SD

spoonman Jul 27, 2007 11:41 PM

I used to live in New York SDCAL. I have been to both parks that I mentioned, which is why I'm able to appreciate them. Saying that there isn't enough rain here for certain types of trees is a moot point. We are talking about trees for an urban park. Obviously there would be irrigation. The mentioned trees don't need to be flooded; they need to receive consistant water to keep the soil moist and thats it.

Perhaps those specific trees may not get as big here or would not be the best choice because of the hardship to the trees, but to get back to my original point, it would be nice to have large shade trees rather than palms which aren't really indigenous either. In reality, those large trees in NYC parks are closer to our native trees than palms are.

About Balboa Park, I'm delighted that we have it and we shoud be proud the city had the where-with-all to create it when it did. I believe *part* of the reason people like BP is that it has beautiful shade trees and a certain mystique which you cannot find at our other "lawn & sparce palms parks".

Marina_Guy Jul 27, 2007 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 2975431)
^^ Civic buildings cost money.

Yes, everything costs money. We just don't collect money for civic good. That is a 'choice' our leadership has made. There is plenty of money in San Diego, the question is how we allocate it as a community. It looks as if the choice San Diego has made is to keep it in the private sector. Our infrastructure is in disrepair, not because there isnt wealth, it is because our leaders have made the choice not to allocate or at least open a dialogue to allocate some of the wealth to civic concerns (yes, that means higher or more taxes).

Instead we have a city government that is so corrupt and beholden to development interests because that is where the money is...

Sad.

SDCAL Jul 28, 2007 2:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 2976575)
Perhaps those specific trees may not get as big here or would not be the best choice because of the hardship to the trees, but to get back to my original point, it would be nice to have large shade trees rather than palms which aren't really indigenous either. In reality, those large trees in NYC parks are closer to our native trees than palms are.

BP is a good example of how palms can work WITH shade trees. As i mentioned before, the main tree I see growing that big here are eucalyptus which is what the big trees in BP are - - trees that can't grow in the Northeast.

I agree palms are not native to our region, but they obviously thrive here as you can see them growing in places where they were not planted but have spread. I don't think the deciduous trees in NY are closer to our native trees than palms are as you mentioned. You seem to think we don't live in a semi-arid climate, our climate is more similar to Phoenix than it is to New York. We have had like 3 inches of rain in the last year, it's hard to get shadey parks even with irrigation. I would like to see more and I think East Village is planting alot of things like these hybrid maples engineered to grow here, but trees take a loooong time to mature so no new park is going to be that nice and shadey for decades. maybe with advances in bioengineering we will see the options increase with drought-resitant shade trees that grow quicker -

spoonman Jul 28, 2007 7:38 AM

Just to show you that there are large shade trees which area native to the area, here are some pics of trees which are native according to UC Berkeley. They look a lot more like normal park type trees in my original pics than palms or anything you'd find native in Phoenix.

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...0951/0031.jpeg

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...3491/0026.jpeg

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...2555/0001.jpeg

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...1101/0291.jpeg

bushman61988 Jul 28, 2007 5:15 PM

Construction Updates
 
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...Loftsat707.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...Loftsat707.jpg


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...agePoint-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...tagePoint2.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...agePoint-1.jpg
Construction is on the 11th floor, with almost 30 floors left to go...this tower is going to be MASSIVE...too bad it couldnt just reach the 500 foot ceiling...


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...Sapphire-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28.../Sapphire2.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...Sapphire-1.jpg
Construction is already up to the 2nd floor. That parking garage really took a long time...took almost a year to complete, but now the tower is on it's way up...anyone know how many feet? all they say is 32 stories...


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...8/RMark1-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...988/Mark-1.jpg
God, the back of that tower is SO ugly! The renderings lie!


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28.../RLegend-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28.../Legend3-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28.../Legend2-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...8/Legend-2.jpg
It looks like work on the exterior is pretty much finished. So what does everyone think about this tower?

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...iewTower-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...ndyFactory.jpg
They put the sign on the Candy Factory, and they also added some details to the exterior. They fixed this up real nice, though. Anyone know what this building is suppose to be used for?


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...RCurrent-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28.../Current-1.jpg


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...terHotel-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...terHotel-2.jpg
The windows look a little bit better than the renderings, i guess. But God, Why did they have to make this tower a box????


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28.../RBreeza-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...8/Breeza-1.jpg


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...RBayside-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28.../Bayside-1.jpg


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...88/RAria-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...88/Aria2-2.jpg
It would look better without that box thing at the top of the building...they didnt show that in the renderings! But does anyone know why that's even necessary??


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...Arpeture-2.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...Aperture-2.jpg

bmfarley Jul 28, 2007 5:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bushman61988 (Post 2977447)
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...88/RAria-1.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...88/Aria2-2.jpg
It would look better without that box thing at the top of the building...they didnt show that in the renderings! But does anyone know why that's even necessary??

I do not know for certain, but I'd assume the box-like structure atop are teh elevator shafts and maybe HVAC stuff.

Derek Jul 28, 2007 11:08 PM

I think the Legend looks nice, I just wish it was a little taller.

keg92101 Jul 29, 2007 3:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 2975502)
We do have Balboa Park which is one of the best parks in the country in my opinion and it a true asset to the city, but other than that the smaller urban parks are pretty bad, discourage people from gathering and look like shit

I don't agree with the earlier post of getting away from "palm trees" and trying to reproduce East Coast parks, our climate is completely different.

Our weather zone gives us great variety in the use of plants and trees that many other areas of the country can't use. I think our new parks should focus on using meditteranean-climate firendly trees such as palms, but do so in a more natural way that encourages gathering and strolling but makes the parks look like they belong here.

Something seems odd about parks that try too look too East-Coastish out of their respective climate zones

Horton plaza broadway entrance is a perfect example of a fake-looking concrete nightmare with palms thrown in to somehow soften the mess, which obviously is very unappealing.

Parks that use warmer-weather plants like palms, bamboo, flowering shrubs like hybiscus, larger bird of paradise/bannana trees/other large-leafed plants, etc generally look better in a more informal Japanese-style landscape that mimics nature with water elements (natural as opposed to fountains), whereas temperate plants like evergreens, maples, cherry trees etc. tend to look better in the more structured and equally-balanced European-style landscapes (take Washhington DC)that are common of public squares back East that include lots of concrete and man-made touches such as fences, fountains, etc.

It seems like downtown projects in the East Village have stopped using palms, as all the new developments are using more temperate looking trees such as the maples engineered to grow here along with the brick buildings to try and make the developments seem more East Coast, but alot of them just don't seem to fit-in here. We can have urban greenery that uses local plants if done right

I think the bayfront area provides a perfect spot to create parkland that will be both appealing, useful and look nothing like the East Coast. Using palms and other sub-tropical plants to create a NATURAL looking and lush pathway for the area that calls for a narrow but long park would be good. I envision it being more of a "strolling' park that people walk through as opposed to a park where people actually stop and gather due to the lack of civic space. As far as use, once projects are built up in that area I think it would get tons of use.

I hate PALMS!!! They are completely worthless and ugly. The great thing about a row of trees is that they create a sense of "place" and provide shade. Palms do neither. From the sidewalk, they seem like nothing more than a brown pole.

Your description of "use" is backwards. The reason why east coast squares, or those in SF (a west coast "eastern city") work so well, is that the park was dedicated 1st, and buildings sprung up around them. If you look at Park at the Park at Petco, it is a good example of this.

Derek Jul 29, 2007 4:05 AM

:banana:

Quote:

Originally Posted by mongozx (Post 14495154)
Did anyone notice that they've already broken ground on the new Marriott @ the Gaslamp? Beyond the recently completed Trellis condos.

http://live6.truelook.com/timages/li...9696790425.jpg


HurricaneHugo Jul 29, 2007 8:02 AM

ooohhh

eburress Jul 29, 2007 4:29 PM

Many of those East Village towers are disappointing, IMO.


Edit->
For all the people who complain about SD's Vancouver look-alike towers, I would gladly take a bunch of those over these East Village turds!

eburress Jul 29, 2007 4:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marina_Guy (Post 2976598)
Yes, everything costs money. We just don't collect money for civic good. That is a 'choice' our leadership has made. There is plenty of money in San Diego, the question is how we allocate it as a community. It looks as if the choice San Diego has made is to keep it in the private sector. Our infrastructure is in disrepair, not because there isnt wealth, it is because our leaders have made the choice not to allocate or at least open a dialogue to allocate some of the wealth to civic concerns (yes, that means higher or more taxes).

Instead we have a city government that is so corrupt and beholden to development interests because that is where the money is...

Sad.

So, the problem is that San Diego doesn't sufficiently tax its residents and is therefore at the mercy of the evil developers? San Diego doesn't have money for its infrastructure, services, or anything else but if it were to raise taxes, it would be able to pay for all of that as well as grand, World-class civic structures? Huh?

SDCAL Jul 29, 2007 6:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 2977148)
Just to show you that there are large shade trees which area native to the area, here are some pics of trees which are native according to UC Berkeley. They look a lot more like normal park type trees in my original pics than palms or anything you'd find native in Phoenix.

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...0951/0031.jpeg

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...3491/0026.jpeg

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...2555/0001.jpeg

http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/imgs/128...1101/0291.jpeg

very nice, i will stand corrected if you tell me where in San Diego county these "native" tree pictures were taken, don't look like any scenes I've seen in the city? Maybe in the mountains of SD county by Julian which have a different climate than in the city?

SDCAL Jul 29, 2007 6:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg92101 (Post 2978199)
I hate PALMS!!! They are completely worthless and ugly. The great thing about a row of trees is that they create a sense of "place" and provide shade. Palms do neither. From the sidewalk, they seem like nothing more than a brown pole.

Your description of "use" is backwards. The reason why east coast squares, or those in SF (a west coast "eastern city") work so well, is that the park was dedicated 1st, and buildings sprung up around them. If you look at Park at the Park at Petco, it is a good example of this.

My point was that there is an eastern and western philosophy to landscape architecture, the western favors obvious man-made touches such as symetrical placement of rows of trees/shrubs, straight walkways and a design based on squareness whereas eastern philosophy focuses more on creating an assymetrical garden setting that mimics nature - both can come from planned parks, I agree the park in front of Petco is very East-Coast looking and uses shade-type trees, I was just saying that when sub-tropical plants and trees are used I think they look better in an asymeticral setting designed to look more natural, but that's just my opinion

As for Palms, guess that's your personal opinion. I think they are beautiful trees and can look very nice if planted in the right places.

bmfarley Jul 29, 2007 6:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 2978659)
So, the problem is that San Diego doesn't sufficiently tax its residents and is therefore at the mercy of the evil developers? San Diego doesn't have money for its infrastructure, services, or anything else but if it were to raise taxes, it would be able to pay for all of that as well as grand, World-class civic structures? Huh?

I feel you wrote that sarcastically, but I believe I would agree (except the bit about being at the mercy of developers).

I feel that local taxes or fees have been insufficient to provide the quality infrastructure a city of 1.3 million needs. And/or, incoming fees/taxes have been unwisely allocated to provide its citizens necessary amenities, public safety, and transportation infrastructure. So, I am open to, one, more wise allocation of existing incoming revenue...and, two, new fees or taxes to fund infrastructure improvements.

spoonman Jul 29, 2007 6:55 PM

.

spoonman Jul 29, 2007 6:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 2978783)
very nice, i will stand corrected if you tell me where in San Diego county these "native" tree pictures were taken, don't look like any scenes I've seen in the city? Maybe in the mountains of SD county by Julian which have a different climate than in the city?

I can't be sure exactly on all of these, but I have seen these trees (top 3) in rural Poway. As for the latter, they can be found in Torrey Pines as well as at the San Diego river.

Hans Gruber Jul 29, 2007 8:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2977487)
I do not know for certain, but I'd assume the box-like structure atop are teh elevator shafts and maybe HVAC stuff.

You've got good renderings and great angle shots of each new buildings. The camera you've used takes the worst pictures I've ever seen! What are you using for those awful looking pictures? It's a shame to see how your pics turned out after all the hard work it must have been to get those great shots.

The best thing to happen to San Diego was the new baseball stadium. Great town even if the new buildings are starting to look a little bland.

mongoXZ Jul 29, 2007 8:37 PM

:previous: Chill. It's just a webcam.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:48 PM.

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