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)

dtell04 Mar 12, 2016 6:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 7367131)
I don't understand why exploring the idea of a university presence in East Village is "out of touch with reality." Are the people trying to lure an SDSU or UCSD annex to Mission Valley also unrealistic? A university plan wouldn't be something that would compete with a stadium, it would be something that could be realistically explored if the convadium fails. It's far from a done deal, it would need to pass the hurdle of a public vote. While I wasn't at the meeting and didn't hear the speakers, I personally think it makes a hell of a lot more sense to put a major university presence downtown than it does in MV. I read San Diego is the largest city in the country without a major university presence (not talking community college) in the urban core. Universities bring centers of technology and innovation and high paying jobs. There's a reason our biotech center emerged around UCSD. A university presence downtown could really synergizes with the IDEA district, city college, new school of architecture, TJ school of law, and really create a dynamic center of education and innovation in an urban setting. A stadium, on the other hand, would bring low wage seasonal jobs. It makes no sense that people think it's a good idea to move the stadium to the crowded city center and take away tailgating, and then expand our leading universities to a non-dynamic quasi suburban area like the current Qualcomm site.

I agree with your assessment. When I say "out of touch with reality" I think that they don't consider how stubborn San Diego can be. In the meeting they used Amazon's influence in Seattle as well as San Francisco State (? - don't remember the university) redeveloping areas in those cities similar to the bus yard. Both had tremendous success. Can it happen here? Sure, but not without the bus yard being available and a serious investor. Marty Block is also pushing the SDSU expansion to the Q, which could use lots of state funding. It would be hard to turn that down, and I doubt he could get that funding pushed to downtown. The bus yard is still technically not available. The convadium team is pushing people around taking a risk trying all this. That's the main difference in all this. The convadium team is going to push until someone or something stops them.
Maybe the best way to stop this would be to make the bus yard available for development. That still doesn't solve the fact there are surrounding parcels privately owned. Hell, the tailgate lot is owned by JMI and he is a major driver in all this. See the picture below. They really are great ideas, but without a competitor they are essentially useless.
I'm not trying to be a downer about all this but it just doesn't seem likely.


http://i1027.photobucket.com/albums/...sypprzvsv.jpeg

SDCAL Mar 12, 2016 9:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 7368803)
I agree with your assessment. When I say "out of touch with reality" I think that they don't consider how stubborn San Diego can be. In the meeting they used Amazon's influence in Seattle as well as San Francisco State (? - don't remember the university) redeveloping areas in those cities similar to the bus yard. Both had tremendous success. Can it happen here? Sure, but not without the bus yard being available and a serious investor. Marty Block is also pushing the SDSU expansion to the Q, which could use lots of state funding. It would be hard to turn that down, and I doubt he could get that funding pushed to downtown. The bus yard is still technically not available. The convadium team is pushing people around taking a risk trying all this. That's the main difference in all this. The convadium team is going to push until someone or something stops them.
Maybe the best way to stop this would be to make the bus yard available for development. That still doesn't solve the fact there are surrounding parcels privately owned. Hell, the tailgate lot is owned by JMI and he is a major driver in all this. See the picture below. They really are great ideas, but without a competitor they are essentially useless.
I'm not trying to be a downer about all this but it just doesn't seem likely.


http://i1027.photobucket.com/albums/...sypprzvsv.jpeg

Dtell, you make some great points. I really think it's hard to envision what will happen in EV or MV until later this year after we see what passes and what doesn't. We have Brigg's initiative and then I thought the mayor was going to put a vote for a contiguous convention center expansion on the ballot, not sure if that will still happen. All this will be playing out in a pretty heated political race, not just for president, but there is a big city council race I've been reading about that could swing the city council from Democrat to Reoublican depending on what happens. I agree with you that right now, any talk of alternate plans like they had at that meeting will be drowned out with Chargers and politics sucking up all the attention. With that said, I think it's good they are having these discussions, because when the dust settles and if the Chargers leave, people might actually start taking a serious interest in development of that rail yard site. I'm cautiously optimistic that this whole convadium thing COULD actually be GOOD for EV IF it fails, because it will have at least brought high profile attention to that area and could expedite development. If it does indeed fail, I think people might start looking at some of these things Quigley and others are suggesting and, who knows, maybe some of the players in favor of the convadium like JMI and people with other visions like Quigley could actually come together and make something else happen. It's a long-shot, but who knows?

One other point I was thinking about regarding the convadium: I'm reading there is a debate going on over whether or not it would be considered a "special tax." This is significant because a special tax requires a 2/3 majority vote whereas a general tax requires a simple majority. From what I'm hearing, legal experts are conflicted on this and it sounds like even if the Briggs measure and/or any measure the Chargers decide to put on the ballot pass, they will almost certainly end up in court. I believe the Chargers have only until early 2017 to decide about LA. If the Chargers do win and the people vote yes on a Chargers stadium/Convadium and it then goes into litigation during the time Spanos needs to decide on LA, what will happen? Will he gamble and turn LA down while the SD plan is pending in court? Will he say screw it, LA is the safest option? Is there any way he could get an extension from the NFL to decide on LA? (I'm guessing this would be hard because the Raiders were promised they could have the option if Spanos turns it down)

Anyway, just food for thought. Regardless of which side one is on we can't deny it's going to be an interesting year! :)

Northparkwizard Mar 14, 2016 12:06 AM

"... Maybe the best way to stop this ..."

You guys are un-fucking-believable NIBMYs. I find it offensive that folks who never lived/worked in east village before they started building condos there are now suddenly protecting some long-dead art enclave.

Sorry to break the news to you but EV's soul died some years ago. Good luck with your obstructionist bullshit.

Bertrice Mar 14, 2016 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 7369653)
"... Maybe the best way to stop this ..."

You guys are un-fucking-believable NIBMYs. I find it offensive that folks who never lived/worked in east village before they started building condos there are now suddenly protecting some long-dead art enclave.

Sorry to break the news to you but EV's soul died some years ago. Good luck with your obstructionist bullshit.


Its laughable that a few condo owners now want to be self-appointed city planners and develop the bus yard. They didn't have any plans until the chargers wanted to do something.

The Flying Dutchman Mar 14, 2016 1:03 AM

That actually isn't true, but I see your point.

SDCAL Mar 14, 2016 6:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 7369653)
"... Maybe the best way to stop this ..."

You guys are un-fucking-believable NIBMYs. I find it offensive that folks who never lived/worked in east village before they started building condos there are now suddenly protecting some long-dead art enclave.

Sorry to break the news to you but EV's soul died some years ago. Good luck with your obstructionist bullshit.

I usually consider a NIMBY to be someone who is resistant to anything happening, not people who don't like one specific proposed project and want to see something better. I'm pretty sure everyone on this board at some point has been critical of a project. You're offended that people who live EV have an opinion on a project here, but I guess it's fine for someone like you who lives in NP or "Bertrice" who lives in Pacific Beach to ridicule people for not thinking a specific project is good for their neighborhood. Pretty fucking ignorant. Are you a realtor or something? I know from being on this blog many years that a lot of the commenters are realtors or in some other profession that profits from building - regardless of how shitty the project is just build it to make $ $

You guys can go gather signatures for the Charger's convadium plan when they try to get it to qualify for the ballot if you feel that strongly about a convadium happening in EV. Or you can just sit at home and insult anyone that's against a convadium on the Internet.

The Flying Dutchman Mar 14, 2016 8:36 AM

This is just fluff, really, but a montage of Before-and-after shots of downtown San Diego:

http://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental-...ing-cityscape/

HurricaneHugo Mar 14, 2016 9:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman (Post 7369928)
This is just fluff, really, but a montage of Before-and-after shots of downtown San Diego:

http://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental-...ing-cityscape/

Makes me miss the whale mural :(

The Flying Dutchman Mar 14, 2016 1:22 PM

Fresh renderings for Manchester Pacific Gateway on their website:http://www.manchesterpacificgateway.com/

aerogt3 Mar 14, 2016 6:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 7367131)
I don't understand why exploring the idea of a university presence in East Village is "out of touch with reality." Are the people trying to lure an SDSU or UCSD annex to Mission Valley also unrealistic? A university plan wouldn't be something that would compete with a stadium, it would be something that could be realistically explored if the convadium fails. It's far from a done deal, it would need to pass the hurdle of a public vote. While I wasn't at the meeting and didn't hear the speakers, I personally think it makes a hell of a lot more sense to put a major university presence downtown than it does in MV. I read San Diego is the largest city in the country without a major university presence (not talking community college) in the urban core. Universities bring centers of technology and innovation and high paying jobs. There's a reason our biotech center emerged around UCSD. A university presence downtown could really synergizes with the IDEA district, city college, new school of architecture, TJ school of law, and really create a dynamic center of education and innovation in an urban setting. A stadium, on the other hand, would bring low wage seasonal jobs. It makes no sense that people think it's a good idea to move the stadium to the crowded city center and take away tailgating, and then expand our leading universities to a non-dynamic quasi suburban area like the current Qualcomm site.

A university would be absolutely great for downtown; much better than a stadium (and I am in favor of a stadium, for lack of any other plausible proposal for the land.)

BUT, while a uni downtown would be great for downtown, it wouldn't be very good for students. High building costs, limited space, unaffordable housing...

spoonman Mar 14, 2016 6:03 PM

Does anyone have an update on what's happening with construction of a tower across from UTC next to Costa Verde? I heard the site was excavated months ago, but have not been to the area recently.

dtell04 Mar 14, 2016 6:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 7369653)
"... Maybe the best way to stop this ..."

You guys are un-fucking-believable NIBMYs. I find it offensive that folks who never lived/worked in east village before they started building condos there are now suddenly protecting some long-dead art enclave.

Sorry to break the news to you but EV's soul died some years ago. Good luck with your obstructionist bullshit.

Oh come on. Is that all you needed to decide how I think about this project? Try cherry picking a little less. I was trying to foster a discussion that wasn't hostile and can maybe look a little more at what other cities did. I'm not against anything, except a bus yard.

mello Mar 14, 2016 9:46 PM

Wow Manchester Pacific Gateway looking sexy! Let's get that baby rolling ASAP:cheers:

I do agree that a University downtown in theory is amazing but they would be limited to the 4 small blocks of the Busyard plus costs of moving the Busyard so we are talking about expensive highrise buildings which will lead to very high costs for the students as Aerogt3 just mentioned.

If you get John Moores involved maybe he would include some to the PETCO parking lots for the Univ but I highly doubt it. So we are really only talking about the Busyard land here and that is quite limiting. I guess you could put four towers of learning a la Pitt Univ and go super vertical.

Streamliner Mar 14, 2016 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman (Post 7369985)
Fresh renderings for Manchester Pacific Gateway on their website:http://www.manchesterpacificgateway.com/

http://www.manchesterpacificgateway....gs/slider2.jpg

http://www.manchesterpacificgateway....gs/slider1.jpg

http://www.manchesterpacificgateway....gs/slider6.jpg

http://www.manchesterpacificgateway....gs/slider4.jpg

Let's all argue about flagpoles again!

Seriously though, I'm not sure if I'm a huge fan of some design elements. The new skybridge makes those two buildings look like a single, stubby building. And the flagpole does a very good job of messing with the scale of the tallest building in the complex. I'd be a lot happier if they removed those two elements.

aerogt3 Mar 15, 2016 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Streamliner (Post 7370773)
Seriously though, I'm not sure if I'm a huge fan of some design elements. The new skybridge makes those two buildings look like a single, stubby building. And the flagpole does a very good job of messing with the scale of the tallest building in the complex. I'd be a lot happier if they removed those two elements.

+1, I found the flagpole and the skybridge both cheesy. Overall though, the project looks nice. Build it!

JerellO Mar 15, 2016 4:55 PM

I actually like the skybridge... It gives off that cube/frame look or an "arch" versus the building just being twin towers which San Diego has a few any ways. I'm thinking Emerson College in LA?? Or Arc de Triomphe

S.DviaPhilly Mar 15, 2016 5:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerellO (Post 7371625)
I actually like the skybridge... It gives off that cube/frame look or an "arch" versus the building just being twin towers which San Diego has a few any ways. I'm thinking Emerson College in LA?? Or Arc de Triomphe

Agree, I like it too. And I bet the view from that skybridge will be pretty awesome as well!

Anyone know timeframe on breaking ground? For some reason I thought it was around now.

nezbn22 Mar 15, 2016 9:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S.DviaPhilly (Post 7371688)
Agree, I like it too. And I bet the view from that skybridge will be pretty awesome as well!

Anyone know timeframe on breaking ground? For some reason I thought it was around now.

Yeah, they said they were going to break ground in March. But that was based on the assumption that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals would have ruled on Briggs' lawsuit by now. Oral arguments were held on February 5, 2015, and the Court's website says cases are typically resolved anywhere from 3 months to a year from the date of oral arguments. We're still waiting for a ruling.

Supposedly, this is the last of the lawsuits that can hold up the development. However, Briggs has vowed to make sure this never gets built, so who knows what other tricks he has up his sleeve. To my knowledge, the only thing he can do now (if he doesn't win at the Court of Appeals) is appeal again to the US Supreme Court. In that event, his appeal would almost certainly be rejected and sent back, which would be the end of the road for him. But by doing so, he'd continue the delay even longer...

IconRPCV Mar 15, 2016 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman (Post 7369985)
Fresh renderings for Manchester Pacific Gateway on their website:http://www.manchesterpacificgateway.com/

Yuck!!!!! It looks like an Atlantis Resort in the Bahamas. Why can't we get decent architecture?

Kenchiku desu Mar 16, 2016 3:08 AM

I agree, yuck!!!! So dreary -- compounded by the fact that there will be three blocks it. Similar vocabulary as the cheesy Metro HQ in Los Angeles -- but a lot more of it -- wider, squatter and more expansive. Acres of the same, tired facade and the same, tired, 1980's, beige POMO fenestration to look at every day.

Looking at the illustrations, you can almost feel the poor renderer giving his or her all to make this thing look halfway decent.

San Diego deserves a lot better -- especially at this prominent location.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.