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)

Will O' Wisp Jul 3, 2019 9:43 PM


Quote:

In a move to ease access to the San Diego airport, more than a half-billion dollars has been pledged toward future transportation projects, which could include high-speed transit options like a people mover or trolley extension.

The funding commitment, announced Tuesday, is contained within a new 10-year agreement between the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority and its airline partners, from Southwest and Alaska airlines to United, American and Delta. The agreement, which establishes the various fees the airlines pay to help fund airport operations, calls for an increase in those levies, which can include landing fees and rents for terminal space.

Over the course of the next 10 years, the per passenger fee all airlines pay to the Airport Authority will double, officials say.

While it is not known yet which transit or roadway projects would qualify for the funding, airport officials say the financial contribution from the airlines now makes it possible to set aside a sizable chunk of money to help pay for costly transportation improvements. Easier access to the airport via transit and added roadways will be needed as part of a planned $3 billion redevelopment of the airport that includes overhauling the aging Terminal 1.

“Airline pre-approval for spending of this nature and of this magnitude really demonstrates our airline partners’ understanding of the importance of transportation and transit improvements to the community,” said Airport Authority CEO Kim Becker.” While specific improvements are still being developed and have not yet been approved, the agreement ensures there will be substantial funding should the Airport Authority and our regional partners determine what’s best.”

The more than $500 million funding pledge will be shared by the airlines and the Airport Authority, which also gets revenues from concessions, parking and rental car fees.

The new airline pact, which follows more than a year of negotiations, marks a major turning point from nearly a year ago when multiple regional agencies roundly criticized the Airport Authority for doing little to address the increased traffic congestion that is expected as passenger volumes continue to grow.

“I do think that this is a major step. People were fighting with each other a year ago and now talking about putting money behind a regional solution,” said Hasan Ikhrata, chief executive of the San Diego Association of Governments. “It’s good to plan but when you allocate money, that means you’re serious.”

News of the funding comes as a group of elected leaders and transportation officials from around the county continue to discuss various options for creating a direct transit connection to the airport. The impetus for the meetings over the last several months is the Airport Authority’s intent to significantly expand the aging Terminal 1.

The project, long a priority for the airlines, involves constructing an entirely new building to replace the existing 19 gates and subsequently demolishing the existing terminal and adding 11 more gates.

Even as local leaders are getting closer to narrowing options for bringing a direct mass transit connection to Lindbergh Field, airport officials are unable to say how much of the more than $500 million contribution will actually go to transit. That’s because it’s still unknown which projects will find favor with all the regional agencies.

What airport leaders will say is that $350 million can be spent for transportation projects both off airport property and on site, which could include a new transit station at the airport, a people mover or trolley extension, or a contribution toward a grand central station.

Any money, however, spent on such transportation improvements not on airport property would be contingent on contributions from other regional agencies like the San Diego Association of Governments, the Port of San Diego, the Metropolitan Transit System and the city of San Diego.

San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, who has been pushing for transit to the airport, said he wants to make sure that people can ultimately reach the airport’s two terminals via the San Diego Trolley.

“It’s no secret that getting to the airport by public transit has not been working very well for decades,” Faulconer said during a news conference to announce the airline agreement. “I often joke that you can see the airport from the trolley and you can wave to it as you go by but it hasn’t been connected.”

Faulconer said that with the new funding, he now believes that “we will create a transportation hub to finally connect the trolley to the airport. It’s long overdue.”

Transportation planners are currently testing four airport transit options to determine which is the most cost effective, and also the most likely to be used by travelers. A recommendation is expected by August.

Three of the four options envision a people mover — either underground or largely street-level — that would connect with a central transit center. Two sites for a grand central station are proposed: a 72-acre Navy site known, until recently, as SPAWAR, and the Intermodal Transportation Center, a long-planned transit hub that would be located slightly closer to the airport. There are currently no approved — or funded — plans for such a transit center.

A fourth option, an extension of the San Diego Trolley to the airport, would generally tie into the existing convention center station to the south and Old Town station to the north, with a stop at the Santa Fe Depot.

As much as the Airport Authority funding will help defray the cost, the price tag for a direct transit connection could potentially reach billions of dollars and take years to implement.

Also announced as part of the new airline agreement is $165 million that could potentially be used for an already planned inbound roadway adjacent to Harbor Drive that would connect Laurel Street to the airport. Plans for the roadway, which would be free of traffic lights, also contemplate reserving right-of-way for future outbound lanes and is expected to remove 45,000 cars per day from Harbor Drive.

The new road could also free up space on Harbor Drive for potential rapid bus or light rail transit.
Don't say we never did anything for ya

mello Jul 3, 2019 10:34 PM

^^^ All this talk is great but when are we going to see shovels in the dirt for the Terminal One redo/Expansion?? It is almost 2020 and we have half our airport operating out of a third world terminal. Too much back and forth on "what should we do about transit" holding up the start of this project.

Will O: Back to last page's discussion, I don't think anyone here is advocating for a giant stadium a la the Spanos proposal of 2016. We want to see a state of the art arena like what the Sacramento Kings just got built in the parking lot behind Petco and the new Park 12 project. That is the perfect spot for it.

When Joseph Tsai wants to build his Ali Baba North American headquarters here he can do it on the MTS busyard site and adjacent parcels. Like Hugo said our Arena situation is embarrassing and lets face it downtown can be a bit dead from October through April and an NHL and or NBA team would give us something to do during those months and wouldn't compete with Padres schedule at all.

Will O' Wisp Jul 4, 2019 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 8623140)
^^^ All this talk is great but when are we going to see shovels in the dirt for the Terminal One redo/Expansion?? It is almost 2020 and we have half our airport operating out of a third world terminal. Too much back and forth on "what should we do about transit" holding up the start of this project.

VERY rough timeline. Don't blame me if schedule slip throws this all out of whack.

Summer 2019: Final selection of airport transit connection
Winter 2019: Terminal 1 EIR (with transit connections) released for public comment
Summer 2020: Terminal 1 EIR certified and approved by Airport Authority
Winter 2020: Terminal 1 EIR approved by Coastal Commission, construction contracts put out to bid
Spring 2021: Construction begins on Terminal 1
2023-24: Construction on Terminal 1 complete


Plans on the San Diego Grand Central are fuzzier, mainly due to SANDAG's shaky funding and internal disputes over their new regional plan's scale.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 8623140)
Will O: Back to last page's discussion, I don't think anyone here is advocating for a giant stadium a la the Spanos proposal of 2016. We want to see a state of the art arena like what the Sacramento Kings just got built in the parking lot behind Petco and the new Park 12 project. That is the perfect spot for it.

When Joseph Tsai wants to build his Ali Baba North American headquarters here he can do it on the MTS busyard site and adjacent parcels. Like Hugo said our Arena situation is embarrassing and lets face it downtown can be a bit dead from October through April and an NHL and or NBA team would give us something to do during those months and wouldn't compete with Padres schedule at all.

There's a fault line that goes directly though that lot, which means you couldn't fit a stadium without taking at least part of the bus yards. That's why all the renderings of the Chargers' stadium were shoved off to the side like that. And when you see what the area could look like instead...

https://sandiego.urbdezine.com/files.../image-21.jpeg

...do we really need to build another stadium in Downtown when Chula Vista and Midway are also viable options?

Steadfast Jul 7, 2019 7:17 AM

I agree... A downtown arena/stadium would be an epic waste of prime residential or commercial/office space.
The backside of Petco might be the only real exception to that IMO. That parcel is pretty isolated from downtown...

Will O' Wisp Jul 8, 2019 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 8625769)
I agree... A downtown arena/stadium would be an epic waste of prime residential or commercial/office space.
The backside of Petco might be the only real exception to that IMO. That parcel is pretty isolated from downtown...

iirc that area is already predesignated for high rise residential. MTS says they're going to build 500 units on 1.5-2 acres at the 12th and Imperial Station, pretty sure that's the spot they're talking about.

Nv_2897 Jul 8, 2019 5:02 PM

The Navy Headquarters is starting to make a presence on the skyline

https://i.imgur.com/uKmOcNO.png

Credit to Skyline Webcams

Northparkwizard Jul 10, 2019 1:54 AM

Columbia & A drawings.
https://i.imgur.com/yuicZWj.png

13th & F drawings.
https://i.imgur.com/OtBnmVY.png

Steadfast Jul 10, 2019 3:04 AM

Columbia & A is a beast!

Will O' Wisp Jul 10, 2019 6:58 AM

https://i.imgur.com/ju9WcbU.jpg

Recent post on reddit from superninjahype

Streamliner Jul 10, 2019 3:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp (Post 8628466)
Recent post on reddit from superninjahype

Great pic! Pacific Gate is my favorite new tower. It looks like a rendering here.

Will O' Wisp Jul 10, 2019 8:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Streamliner (Post 8628659)
Great pic! Pacific Gate is my favorite new tower. It looks like a rendering here.

It almost makes me sad that it'll be completely surrounded by fellow high rises after MPG, the 2nd Bosa tower, and the office dept replacement are finished.

Almost... :skyscraper:

NYC2ATX Jul 11, 2019 11:12 PM

Pacific Gateway is honestly one of my favorite projects going up in America right now. For both the excellent way in which it will enhance and define the San Diego waterfront, and the fabulous distillation of Art Deco that incorporates pink stone (I hope?) and gradually decreases in height towards the water. San Diego has one of the world's great waterfronts :tup:

SDCAL Jul 12, 2019 9:21 PM

Pacific Gateway timeline
 
Are the other buildings besides the Navy headquarters still on time for being built?

The Manchester PG website stopped posting updates in 2019, it looks like the last update was last fall. The website is also still extremely generic with no specifics on tenants. When you get to the point where construction begins, isn’t there usually announcement on which hotels/businesses/retail will be going in?

Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but something seems kind of “off” with the project and the communication from Manchester.

staplesla Jul 12, 2019 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 8631065)
Are the other buildings besides the Navy headquarters still on time for being built?

The Manchester PG website stopped posting updates in 2019, it looks like the last update was last fall. The website is also still extremely generic with no specifics on tenants. When you get to the point where construction begins, isn’t there usually announcement on which hotels/businesses/retail will be going in?

Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but something seems kind of “off” with the project and the communication from Manchester.

I just called the number on their website to inquire about the timeline. I was told, “We are focused on completing the Navy building and that is all we are prepared to comment on at this time.” So I said, “so is the rest of the project on hold?”. The lady told me to have a great weekend and she hung up. :shrug:

SDCAL Jul 13, 2019 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staplesla (Post 8631147)
I just called the number on their website to inquire about the timeline. I was told, “We are focused on completing the Navy building and that is all we are prepared to comment on at this time.” So I pressed about the other buildings and the lady told me to have a great weekend and she hung up. :shrug:

Wow. So we’ll get one Navy building and a bunch of empty lots - or worse surface parking lots - there?

The good thing about the project is the buildings were supposed to be similar in design. If they sell parts off I wonder if we’ll get a mosh-mash. It’s a shame since that’s the most valuable undeveloped waterfront property on the west coast.

Thanks for investigating!!

Will O' Wisp Jul 13, 2019 9:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 8631181)
Wow. So we’ll get one Navy building and a bunch of empty lots - or worse surface parking lots - there?

The good thing about the project is the buildings were supposed to be similar in design. If they sell parts off I wonder if we’ll get a mosh-mash. It’s a shame since that’s the most valuable undeveloped waterfront property on the west coast.

Thanks for investigating!!

Or, you know, the minimum wage employee they've got answering the phones is only allowed to use that one soundbite. And she hung up after someone kept badgering her for answers she's not allowed to give, and probably doesn't even know herself.



This honestly doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know. MPG has said they're focusing on finishing the Navy building atm, and they haven't said when they're going to start on the rest. That could mean just about anything, including that construction is progressing normally and MPG sees no reason to give potential rivals any more info than they need to.

Boatguy619 Jul 13, 2019 11:45 PM

Delete

SDCAL Jul 14, 2019 2:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp (Post 8631715)
Or, you know, the minimum wage employee they've got answering the phones is only allowed to use that one soundbite. And she hung up after someone kept badgering her for answers she's not allowed to give, and probably doesn't even know herself.



This honestly doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know. MPG has said they're focusing on finishing the Navy building atm, and they haven't said when they're going to start on the rest. That could mean just about anything, including that construction is progressing normally and MPG sees no reason to give potential rivals any more info than they need to.

You’re right, it could mean anything. But the fact they haven’t named a single tenant except the military doesn’t look good considering the timelines they presented. They said a lot of the construction was going to happen simultaneously and now they’ve changed course, so there has to be some reason for that. Projects announce timelines and tenants all the time, suggesting they are afraid of “rivals” and are secretly progressing normally but afraid to tell anyone they are on time seems extremely unlikely.

These are the timelines they presented when they broke ground:

Block 1A (Open space and waterfront plaza): 2022
Block 1B (Boutique Hotel, Office and Retail): 2021
Block 2A/B (Convention Hotel and Retail): 2021
Block 3A (Office and Retail): 2020
Block 3B (Navy General Administration Building): 2020
Block 4A/B (Office and Retail): 2021

There’s no way those can be met if they are just focusing on completing the Navy HQ for the foreseeable future.

If they had financing and tenants, I think they’d be moving forward with these other things now.

staplesla Jul 15, 2019 1:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp (Post 8631715)
Or, you know, the minimum wage employee they've got answering the phones is only allowed to use that one soundbite. And she hung up after someone kept badgering her for answers she's not allowed to give, and probably doesn't even know herself.

No offense to you staplesla, but pressuring someone after they've already told you "No Comment" is kind of a jerk move.

I’m not going to hypothesize on what her response means. But please don’t assume I’m naive enough to speak to a receptionist, nor am I one to “badger” someone. I spoke with Stephanie Brown, VP of Communications for Manchester Financial Group.

staplesla Jul 16, 2019 12:50 AM

California Theatre remodel sails through first government review
 
A drastic remodel of the California Theatre sailed through its first government review, raising the likelihood it will be rapidly approved.

The design review committee of Civic San Diego, downtown’s planning agency, gave gushing reviews of the project Wednesday, unanimously approving it to move forward.

At nearly 100 years old, the California Theatre building has been falling apart for years but efforts to remake the site had been thwarted by preservationists. After striking a deal with preservation group Save Our Heritage Organisation, the developer is moving to quickly get approvals by the fall and begin construction by October 2020.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...ernment-review


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:32 PM.

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