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)

spoonman May 22, 2007 4:09 AM

Derek, I don't think they see it that way...

It's my opinion that they believe we are a bunch of spoiled urbanites who wish they'd leave

dl3000 May 22, 2007 4:58 AM

I wish theyd leave.

bmfarley May 22, 2007 5:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 2849271)
It doesn't look like Miramar will be available anytime in the near, or according to this a-hole form the navy, long-term future

Winter to San Diego: Miramar is off limits

By Gidget Fuentes - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday May 16, 2007 21:14:10 EDT

SAN DIEGO — Navy Secretary Donald C. Winter thought he heard the last of the fury last year from local officials who’ve long been hot to get their hands on Miramar Marine Corps Air Station to convert into an international airport.

But when he arrived for a breakfast meeting of the regional business group on Wednesday, among the fact sheets and other items of note Winter saw was an issuance from the regional airport authority, the de facto leader of the still-unsuccessful fight to get Miramar and convert it for civilian use.

During his first visit here last year as Navy secretary, Winter tackled numerous questions about Miramar and possibilities of joint or civilian use. Local voters rejected the idea in a countywide ballot last year, which was a symbolic gesture since Navy officials weren’t offering Miramar for any alternate uses.

But the first question posed to him during Wednesday’s question-and-answer session with chamber members was an echo of the recent past: Will Miramar fit into the region’s long-term plans for a larger airport?

The question came a day after the Federal Aviation Administration singled out San Diego’s Lindbergh Field, a single-runway downtown airport, as one of 14 civilian airports nationwide that will need more capacity between now and 2025.

“There are no plans whatsoever,” responded Winter, speaking before several hundred attending a monthly gathering of the San Diego Military Affairs Council at the Admiral Kidd Club. “Miramar is now and forever will be critical” to support the Navy and the Marine Corps.”

Years of base closures and realignments have left little room to change that view since the Navy and Marine Corps have fewer air bases and airfields for training and operations, he explained. “We have truly lost the elasticity of the facilities,” he noted. “We just don’t have the flexibility that we used to.”

Sitting down with several reporters after the breakfast, the Miramar question remained on Winter’s radar.

“I really thought the Miramar issue was behind us,” he said, surprised at the lack of understanding some community members have of the military.

Miramar’s importance, he said, isn’t just to support the short-term needs of the Marine Corps and other military forces continuing to fight and operate in Iraq and in the Persian Gulf region. The services must deal with the long-term demands of supporting and sustaining military operations and missions on a global scale, more so “than we did in the Cold War” era

I maintain that if SD was willing to build a replacement to Miramar to the same standards as Miramar has today... that they just may be willing to relocate... and leave Miramar avialable for a commercial airport. It is unrealistic to think any thing less, in my opinion.

And I nominate Ramona as a candidate site.

Derek May 22, 2007 5:32 AM

Ramona? How so?

bmfarley May 22, 2007 5:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek loves SD (Post 2849892)
Ramona? How so?

What do you mean? There's already an airport out there.... What? Do you expect me to have plans already ready?

Derek May 22, 2007 6:04 AM

I don't know the area well. I don't get up there much. Can you show me a map or something suggesting where it will go?

(Sorry, I don't even know where the airport is or how much land is there. :()

bmfarley May 22, 2007 7:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek loves SD (Post 2849939)
I don't know the area well. I don't get up there much. Can you show me a map or something suggesting where it will go?

(Sorry, I don't even know where the airport is or how much land is there. :()

Well... it would probably be easier to go to google maps and look at an aerial of Ramona. Look to the west of Ramona for the airport.

I am only suggesting it as a candidate to consider. I have no idea how practical it would be for military purposes given surrounding hills or mountains, or the ability of the town to support a military presence.

Derek May 22, 2007 1:50 PM

Alright, thank you.:)

SDCAL May 22, 2007 5:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek loves SD (Post 2849735)
Shouldn't the Marines have a little compassion? After all, we allow them to use our city land.

Hahahahahahaha :jester:

Compassion? When in the short history of the city of San Diego has the military had compassion?? Every major issue they have had a hand in has been specifically tailored to addresseing the needs of the military ONLY, they don't care about the city's development.

The question one has to ask themselves in fairness over this issue is does the military need this SPECIFIC site for what they do there, or could the purposes be served somewhere else? When the military first established a presenece in San Diego, it was a small town and it seemed like a logical navy loaction because it was on a bay and well to the south of California's urabn areas. Now that San Diego IS an urban area, the bastards in charge refuse to budge. The question is how practical is it to have such a large military base in a large, rapidly expanding metropolitan area? The military may have alot of local supporters, but they should watch out because when we get to the point where the airport is not functional and the city begins losing revenue, their refusal to budge on the airport issue will become a PR nightmare for them, and rightfully so!!!!!!

They can most certainly move, they have WAY more options in terms of where they can move than the airport does for where it can move fair is fair

Derek May 22, 2007 11:05 PM

Oh, don't worry I was being sarcastic.:)


But no, I don't think they need this specific site. For the exact reasons you listed above.

Marina_Guy May 22, 2007 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 2850649)
The military may have alot of local supporters...

Unfortunately for the foreseeable future, I don't think San Diego has the guts to stand up to the military. San Diego's voting patterns and culture suggest this. The region had a chance to diversify more in the 1990's, but world events since then have impacted our chance to break free of the defense department and the military industrial complex. Many are afraid to say no to military $$$. I could say a lot more. But I'll be quiet!

IconRPCV May 23, 2007 12:48 AM

Unfortunately the military and its industrial complex are all that is keeping our nation afloat. If we were to cut back on them, which will never happen with the current party in power, our economy would implode. However our nation will continue to stagnate, much like what will happen to San Diego without a new airport, until we do so. As an educator I can only dream of the day when we will spend billions for our children instead of billions for the military.

That being said I am not badmouthing any of our brave soldiers in the military, just the complex making them die needlessly to keep some fat cat oil barons rich.

dl3000 May 23, 2007 1:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marina_Guy (Post 2851516)
Many are afraid to say no to military $$$. I could say a lot more. But I'll be quiet!

Id say a lot things that would boil down to "get out." If we had a great airport, the economy should not be affected that much. Don't get me started on foreign policy.

eburress May 23, 2007 2:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl3000 (Post 2851762)
Id say a lot things that would boil down to "get out." If we had a great airport, the economy should not be affected that much.

San Diego worrying about losing military money is comparable to a crappy-ass small town worried about losing their prison and the money it provides. You'd think "America's Finest City" would be above worrying about losing military money.

And yes, if SD had a decent airport, it wouldn't need military money.

sandiegodweller May 23, 2007 2:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 2851854)
San Diego worrying about losing military money is comparable to a crappy-ass small town worried about losing their prison and the money it provides. You'd think "America's Finest City" would be above worrying about losing military money.

And yes, if SD had a decent airport, it wouldn't need military money.

Are you serious?

The yearly economic impact of each of the 3 aircraft carriers (2 current, 1 planned) is equal to the amount that a Super Bowl brings to a city.

Can you name one other industry currently in San Diego that comes close?

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont..._1n30ship.html

"In January, the Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce released a study showing that Pentagon spending supports nearly one in every five jobs from San Ysidro to Oceanside. It estimated the military's annual economic impact at $20 billion – about 65 percent of it from the Navy."

SDDTProspector May 23, 2007 3:32 AM

I agree with majority.....
 
San Diego is now being held back by the alcholic father that won't leave the sons house and find somewhere to else crash........:slob:

The military is a double edged sword it helped it grow up but now is it biggest obstacle for growth....

Plan and simple........

Marina_Guy May 23, 2007 4:17 AM

Rise of the Iron Horses
As airplane operations decline, San Diego might consider following the example of the world's most accomplished investor.
By Gary Sutton
Voice of San Diego

Wednesday, May 23, 2007 | Warren Buffett is the smartest investor in the world. His latest moves show San Diego how to think about our airport.

Buffett, by the way, became the second richest guy in America by simply seeing farther than the rest of us. He didn't invent anything or inherit money or start something or create a monopoly or catch some overnight fad. Decade after decade, he just figured out what was going to happen in the future and bought shares accordingly.

Start by knowing that Buffett loves airplanes. He once joked that he hoped to be buried in his private jet. But soon the guy fell in love with charter services, so he bought the biggest one, NetJets.

Now these aren't huge planes, these are smaller birds that often use the secondary airports sprinkled across our county. And the smart money, from people who are spending their own, are developing whole new fleets of lightweight jets, anticipating the future is going that way. (Spectrum Aeronautical, at Palomar Airport, is already taking orders for 2009 deliveries. And they have six competitors with small jets in test phase or on drawing boards, but financed.)

Buffett, of course, doesn't own any airline stocks. He's not into losing money. So what's he investing in today?

Have a seat, please.

Railroads. Yes, the old iron horses. Buffett's recently put billions into the major railroads. That's billions, with a "b."

Of course Buffett gets around. Maybe he saw how Europe, having $5 per gallon gas (in liter equivalents) for several decades, has adapted. It's a more compact continent, for sure, but the prevalence of train travel in Europe versus America is stunning. And heads don't turn over there when a business suit and briefcase putt-putt past on a Moped.

Perhaps Buffett noticed that in the long haul, decade after decade, the price of a gallon of gas here seems to go in one direction. That direction would not be down. Or, being a number-cruncher, it could be that one of Buffett's analysts has gone through the Official Airline Guide archives, and noticed a trend. That trend being fewer North American flights, year after year, for the past 10.

Certainly Buffett's aware that places like Palomar Airport, Gillespie Field, Montgomery Field, Brown Field, Borrego Valley Airport, Agua Caliente Airport, Fallbrook Airport, Jacumba Airport, Ramona Airport and Octillo Airport are quiet, peaceful and underused patches of concrete.

Could it be that Buffett also noticed that traffic is down at Lindbergh Field?

Yup. You read that right. Lindbergh's traffic is down.

Using the airport's published documents, the total takeoffs and landing for 2006 were 220,839. Dig back into the oldest published prior year, 1999, and you'll see that Lindbergh Field handled 222,354 takeoffs and landings back then. Call this anything but don't call it growth.

And this isn't peculiar to San Diego.

Government officials, those folks who spend other people's money, somehow haven't paid excessive attention to these numbers. The airport boosters hired PR folks who spun new phrases like the "Nation's Busiest Single Runway Airport" to fog over the facts. Kind of reminds one of that "Weapons of Mass Destruction" thing, eh?

Passenger counts are up, however, and that's no surprise to anybody who's flown lately. Have you seen an empty seat? Me neither. Will that change? Not when empty seats and rising fuel costs shove the airlines into deeper losses.

Boeing's fighting this fuel expense, like the new little jets are, with composite materials for their 787 Dreamliner. This'll save about 20 percent in fuel per mile over today's airliners. At current rates of increase for oil, however, that falls way short of keeping up. So costs per flight mile will jump anyway.

And get this, the multi-million dollar forecasts San Diego paid for, predicting airport growth, all assumed ticket prices will drop. Don't we wish? The single biggest variable expense for any airplane is fuel. Most airlines are losing money at current prices. So where would you guess tickets are headed from here?

Well, Boeing's currently benefiting from the Airbus debacle, and is getting strong Dreamliner orders. But Boeing showed prototypes with more comfortable seating, trying to alleviate passenger complaints, with a rather cool alignment of staggered seats, eight across. Everybody loved the layout. The problem is, hardly anybody bought that configuration. Most airlines insisted, with their orders, that Boeing shove the seats back together, nine across, for up to 330 bodies wedged into a flight. And unless they want to go bankrupt, they'll need to pack every one. And unless the Arabs and our pal in Venzuela slash the price of oil, fares still must go up.

Look at this from a local economic perspective. San Diego's biggest business is tourism. Our image is world class. Imagine flying into Lindbergh for the first time. If you're on the left window, you see a sparkling bay, a graceful bridge and a dramatic skyline coming in. From the right, it's Balboa Park. Stepping out, you're tranquilized by a salty sea breeze. During that harbor drive, the masts seem to wave hello to you, welcome, visitors. You hear boats and waves.

If you're a tourist or conventioneer, chances are your hotel's minutes away. There's not a more convenient airport in the country -- nestled near to a resurgent downtown.

Yes, some business growth went to North County and the UTC area. And Miramar, one of the prior wet dreams, would've been more convenient for those travelers. But North County's growth was recently eclipsed by the South Bay, neutering that argument.

Just imagine visiting for the first time, but landing at Miramar. On the port window, you see our landfill and the nation's largest RV dealer. To the starboard, it's franchise row and furniture stores mixed with adult entertainment. Upon exit, a waft of desert air dries your nose, with hints of smog and you hear the sounds of jammed traffic on the I-15 and the 805. This introduces a different San Diego to our visitors.

Sure, there are common-sense things like diverting more commuter routes to the smaller airports and shifting freight to the emptiness at Brown Field. But that misses the big picture: takeoffs and landings are dropping. There is no problem. Okay, should the price of oil drop in half and stay there, then Warren Buffett's a dummy and we would suffer from airport constipation.

If the new airport commission could just take their $170,000 salaries and do nothing, we'll all benefit. That's strange advice in a city and state that are going broke, but that last gang of bobbleheads spent $17 million trying to convince us the end was near.

Remember that?

Lavish entertainment expenses rang up while examining the Borrego Springs airport. No mention of the fact that Borrego's average summer temperatures mean a commercial plane cannot takeoff from there with a full load of fuel ... from a location that's 15 miles further from downtown San Diego than John Wayne Airport. That gaggle of bandits actually reviewed Borrego with straight faces.

Brown Field, unused, got no such lavish inspection since it's tougher to justify overnights when they're nearby, and the wine cellars there lean towards screw-top varietals. Sure, putting air freight out there makes sense, but much of that stuff comes and goes during off-peak times, making the relief minor. On the other hand, since freight takes space to load, warehouse and truck, the handling expenses would drop with that cheaper real estate.

March Air Force Base? No ridicule needed. That lunacy is self-evident.

Imperial Valley with a high speed rail? When we can't even get high speed rail through to LA, with 250,000 cars going both ways every day? The suburban NIMBYs killed that LA idea, and can't you hear the back-packers and environmentalists shriek if they hear plans for a bullet train slashing through our eastern slopes?

So perhaps the previous commission thought that, by studying the bizarre, it would make Miramar appear inevitable. One surprise was something that nobody noticed. That came when Duncan Hunter pointed out that Miramar is critical for the Marines when they start training with the F-35.

The F-35?

That's a vertical takeoff and landing airplane. It should operate from an oversized driveway.

So, we see Warren Buffett thinking the price of fuel is going up. He's betting his own money and shareholders'. Small airplane makers think security lines at big airports and underused regional airports will build their market. They're betting their own money and some investors'. Airlines, wanting to reduce flights to fill cabins tighter, are configuring their new aircraft to do so, in the belief that fuel prices will continue up. They're betting their jobs and shareholders' money.

Government officials, spending your tax dollars, believe the price of fuel will drop, bringing down air fares and building commercial air traffic.

Who would you bet on being right?

Gary Sutton is a retired CEO. He is the author of "Corporate Canaries Avoid Business Disasters with a Coal Miner's Secrets." Send a letter to the editor.

eburress May 23, 2007 4:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandiegodweller (Post 2851964)
Can you name one other industry currently in San Diego that comes close?

"In January, the Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce released a study showing that Pentagon spending supports nearly one in every five jobs from San Ysidro to Oceanside. It estimated the military's annual economic impact at $20 billion – about 65 percent of it from the Navy."

That's my point. SD currently is very dependent upon the military but it doesn't have to be that way. They could have an airport, corporate expansion, higher paying jobs, etc...

sandiegodweller May 23, 2007 5:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 2852187)
That's my point. SD currently is very dependent upon the military but it doesn't have to be that way. They could have an airport, corporate expansion, higher paying jobs, etc...

Where would you suggest that the Naval Pacific Fleet and the Marine Corps relocate?

bmfarley May 23, 2007 5:24 AM

fwiw... the piece in the Voice is an opinion piece. I think some of the information, although may be factual, may tell a different story than reality.

My disclaimer... I don't know the truth about the airport projections right now.... but the obvious is that passenger boardings are up.

If landings/takeoffs are flat... that means current planes are carrying more people. The functionality of Lindbergh is tied to runway capacity, or takeoffs/landings. Sooner or later the demand for bigger planes to carry more people will collide with the runway length being too short.... and then more demand for more takeoffs/landings. If more planes cannot gain access to Lindbergh... then the laws of supply and demand tell us prices go up.

We've already heard from someone else that since bigger planes cannot use Lindbergh, then direct flights distant locations are not booked.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:26 AM.

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