SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2 [Archive] - Page 142

Streamliner

Apr 10, 2019, 3:25 PM

Horton Plaza as a tech campus? Here’s a preview
April 10, 2019

Article: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/story/2019-04-09/horton-plaza-as-a-tech-campus-heres-a-preview

Horton Plaza is showing signs of new life — albeit only in picture form for now.

Wednesday, the mall’s new owner, Stockdale Capital Partners, released three renderings, showing off publicly for the first time its vision for the former Nordstrom building on G Street and previewing a tenant amenity deck where the mall’s food court used to be.

It’s a partial unveiling that comes ahead of the developer’s Thursday visit to City Hall, where San Diego’s economic development committee will weigh in on an agreement that would allow the developer to replace the retail center with a mixed-use office campus.

“It’s a radical change in terms of taking this from an outdated mall to a modern, creative office (campus),” said Dan Michaels, managing director for Stockdale. “The goal is to make sure that, as you rise above (the ground floor), you see views across the city.”

...

Specific elements of the project are still in flux, but the current high-level plan involves converting second-floor-and-above storefronts into around 772,000 square feet of modern office space. Trendy food, beverage and fitness concepts would take over the roughly 300,000 square feet in remaining ground-floor space.

Outside the former Nordstrom (1st and G, looking northeast):
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/47110ec/2147483647/strip/true/crop/3473x2315+264+0/resize/840x560!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2F15%2F2e%2Fa63dfe8b436e97d0f907255aba28%2Fhorton-nordstrom-exterior.JPG

Inside the former Nordstrom:
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/96588ee/2147483647/strip/true/crop/4096x2731+0+135/resize/840x560!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2Fb8%2F45%2F7e95529c4482bdca329516e6584d%2Fhorton-nordstrom-interior.JPG

Amenity Deck:
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/0cfae9f/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2033x1355+184+0/resize/840x560!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2F51%2F2a%2F969bdb1b47e1a398c7ff4799a07c%2Fhorton-amenities-deck.jpg

SDCAL

Apr 11, 2019, 6:44 AM

Horton Plaza as a tech campus? Here’s a preview
April 10, 2019

Article: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/story/2019-04-09/horton-plaza-as-a-tech-campus-heres-a-preview

Outside the former Nordstrom (1st and G, looking northeast):
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/47110ec/2147483647/strip/true/crop/3473x2315+264+0/resize/840x560!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2F15%2F2e%2Fa63dfe8b436e97d0f907255aba28%2Fhorton-nordstrom-exterior.JPG

Inside the former Nordstrom:
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/96588ee/2147483647/strip/true/crop/4096x2731+0+135/resize/840x560!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2Fb8%2F45%2F7e95529c4482bdca329516e6584d%2Fhorton-nordstrom-interior.JPG

Amenity Deck:
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/0cfae9f/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2033x1355+184+0/resize/840x560!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2F51%2F2a%2F969bdb1b47e1a398c7ff4799a07c%2Fhorton-amenities-deck.jpg

I admit I’m having trouble seeing the vision for HP. If it succeeds in bringing good tech jobs downtown then it will be good, but I’m kind of underwhelmed by those renderings. It looks like a pretty run of the mill office building. In fact, it looks kind of like something from a suburban office park plopped downtown.

I also thought the plan included taller buildings?

They also seem vague on what will go in the retail spaces.

This also opens up a discussion about if downtown needs a shopping district, which most major downtowns have. Without HP, there is really no major retail downtown (not sure if they are keeping the Macy’s). Meanwhile, UTC continues to explode with a lot of major retail/design stores being built. In fact I read that Design Within Reach which used to be downtown but closed many years ago is going to open in UTC.

I’m wondering if with the trolley extension the thought is that UTC is “the” design/high end retail center of SD so downtown doesn’t need any of this?

Fozcat

Apr 11, 2019, 4:03 PM

I feel like Manchester Pacific Gateway is gonna change that. Also, I feel like a lot of UTC's success does boil down to the fact that there are a lot of high-paying jobs there, which could translate to similar success and retail demand downtown if the Horton Campus is successful, particularly if they land themselves a unicorn like Apple or the like. Either way, I see good things on the horizon.

Nv_2897

Apr 12, 2019, 1:01 AM

I admit I’m having trouble seeing the vision for HP. If it succeeds in bringing good tech jobs downtown then it will be good, but I’m kind of underwhelmed by those renderings. It looks like a pretty run of the mill office building. In fact, it looks kind of like something from a suburban office park plopped downtown.

I also thought the plan included taller buildings?

They also seem vague on what will go in the retail spaces.

This also opens up a discussion about if downtown needs a shopping district, which most major downtowns have. Without HP, there is really no major retail downtown (not sure if they are keeping the Macy’s). Meanwhile, UTC continues to explode with a lot of major retail/design stores being built. In fact I read that Design Within Reach which used to be downtown but closed many years ago is going to open in UTC.

I’m wondering if with the trolley extension the thought is that UTC is “the” design/high end retail center of SD so downtown doesn’t need any of this?

Unfortunately i heard the taller buildings are for phase 2 if the project is sucessful

Nv_2897

Apr 12, 2019, 1:04 AM

There is a crane at Pacific Gateway, folks. I saw it with my own eyes :)

I passed by the MPG today and by the looks of it they are getting ready for a second crane

Will O' Wisp

Apr 12, 2019, 3:59 AM

There is a crane at Pacific Gateway, folks. I saw it with my own eyes :)

I've been seen it several times this week, and yet for some reason it never hit me that we should all be screaming CRANE ALERT CRANE ALERT :ahhh:

This is really happening boys. The plans are done, the permits are signed, and the checks are deposited. Check out this pic someone in the navy building posted on reddit:

https://i.imgur.com/PBcPBJq.jpg
Source (https://www.reddit.com/r/sandiego/comments/bc3gjj/manchester_pacific_gateway_progress/)

Will O' Wisp

Apr 12, 2019, 4:05 AM

[Accidental double post]

JerellO

Apr 12, 2019, 5:22 AM

I admit I’m having trouble seeing the vision for HP. If it succeeds in bringing good tech jobs downtown then it will be good, but I’m kind of underwhelmed by those renderings. It looks like a pretty run of the mill office building. In fact, it looks kind of like something from a suburban office park plopped downtown.

I also thought the plan included taller buildings?

They also seem vague on what will go in the retail spaces.

This also opens up a discussion about if downtown needs a shopping district, which most major downtowns have. Without HP, there is really no major retail downtown (not sure if they are keeping the Macy’s). Meanwhile, UTC continues to explode with a lot of major retail/design stores being built. In fact I read that Design Within Reach which used to be downtown but closed many years ago is going to open in UTC.

I’m wondering if with the trolley extension the thought is that UTC is “the” design/high end retail center of SD so downtown doesn’t need any of this?

I see Fashion Valley more of the design/high end retail center... much more expensive brands are located there.. it’s been called the rodeo drive of San Diego... which is a bit silly in comparison but I get it

JerellO

Apr 12, 2019, 5:28 AM

HurricaneHugo

Apr 12, 2019, 5:58 AM

You can see the crane here!

(Reddit)

https://i.redd.it/h43djrmxkor21.jpg

https://www.reddit.com/r/sandiego/comments/bc3kae/another_san_diego_skyline_pic_during_sunset/

Steadfast

Apr 12, 2019, 6:18 AM

Also regarding a shopping district in downtown, I think I read along with the California theatre development that the city was looking into making C street a revitalized commercial hub with new retail and stuff. With Horton plaza changing, you think some of the stores would look into opening up storefronts along the street?? C street maybe?? The fact that the trolley line runs through, and eventually under it, is a huge benefit.

As far as Manchester gateway. I really hope that it becomes a destination shopping hub as well.. from the renderings, it could be our version of Santa Monica’s 3rd street promenade.

What retail would relocate from HP? There's basically nothing left...
I'm all for walkable, shopable neighborhoods, but it's going to have to happen organically. I say they let the HP transformation happen as planned & keep trying to lure warm bodies downtown. The shopping & amenities will follow.

JerellO

Apr 12, 2019, 8:16 AM

What retail would relocate from HP? There's basically nothing left...
I'm all for walkable, shopable neighborhoods, but it's going to have to happen organically. I say they let the HP transformation happen as planned & keep trying to lure warm bodies downtown. The shopping & amenities will follow.

GameStop was the only place I ever went to haha so that’s all I could think of :(

HurricaneHugo

Apr 12, 2019, 8:17 AM

GameStop was the only place I ever went to haha so that’s all I could think of :(

And now you can buy digital version of games.

Though you can't sell them afterwards

aekrid

Apr 12, 2019, 5:05 PM

Looks like 2AP may not be a concrete slab much longer. This proposal just popped up CivicSD. IIRC the site was intended as a hotel of the same shape so they don't need to tear up the existing parking garage.

https://i.imgur.com/8XFNr2P.jpg

https://civicsd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2018-58_Drawings_03.26.19.pdf

Will O' Wisp

Apr 12, 2019, 7:33 PM

Looks like 2AP may not be a concrete slab much longer. This proposal just popped up CivicSD. IIRC the site was intended as a hotel of the same shape so they don't need to tear up the existing parking garage.

https://civicsd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2018-58_Drawings_03.26.19.pdf

Extremely disappointing. This midget is 3-4 stories shorter than the surrounding blocks and doesn't even meet the minimum FAR requirements. I really hope Civic SD comes back and says they need to make better use of this extremely valuable space.

HurricaneHugo

Apr 13, 2019, 12:42 AM

Does anybody remember the old 2 America Plaza renders that had a tower that looked like OAP's brother?

sandiego_urban

Apr 13, 2019, 1:41 AM

Extremely disappointing. This midget is 3-4 stories shorter than the surrounding blocks and doesn't even meet the minimum FAR requirements. I really hope Civic SD comes back and says they need to make better use of this extremely valuable space.
Agreed. How is this is best use of this space in this location?

Found a couple more renderings on Twitter:

https://live.staticflickr.com/7907/33719063598_2f1c1f1d76_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/7899/47543009132_f2387f206d_z.jpg

https://twitter.com/RealPortfolioSD

sandiego_urban

Apr 13, 2019, 1:47 AM

It appears that First and Beech has undergone a design change for the better. Looks like an updated version of The Grande.

https://live.staticflickr.com/7853/46680446245_a7bc6edc77_z.jpg

The best part is how it brings height to an area where there currently is none.

https://live.staticflickr.com/7892/47543009232_21cbdb501c_z.jpg

https://dcpcsd.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/april-2019-dr-item-6-drawings_03.25.19.pdf

JerellO

Apr 13, 2019, 1:50 AM

And now you can buy digital version of games.

Though you can't sell them afterwards

True, but they also sell e-books 🤷🏻♂️ and libraries still exist. Some people like myself still love having a hard copy.

sandiego_urban

Apr 13, 2019, 1:57 AM

sandiego_urban

Apr 13, 2019, 2:13 AM

Also regarding a shopping district in downtown, I think I read along with the California theatre development that the city was looking into making C street a revitalized commercial hub with new retail and stuff. With Horton plaza changing, you think some of the stores would look into opening up storefronts along the street?? C street maybe?? The fact that the trolley line runs through, and eventually under it, is a huge benefit.

As far as Manchester gateway. I really hope that it becomes a destination shopping hub as well.. from the renderings, it could be our version of Santa Monica’s 3rd street promenade.
I agree that C St. would be a great shopping street. Maybe an urban Target could help jumpstart the trend?

SDCAL

Apr 13, 2019, 2:48 AM

Without getting everyone's hopes up, could the City, FAA and City Council really be in discussions to increase the 500ft height limit? We need answers.

If it’s true there are discussions going on, that itself is encouraging. It seems like for the last many decades it’s just been an accepted reality that we would have a plateau skyline and no city officials cared to think about changing it.

Is this reliable though? This is the first I’ve heard that any serious discussion was even happening

SDCAL

Apr 13, 2019, 2:50 AM

deleted, double post

SDCAL

Apr 13, 2019, 2:52 AM

SDCAL

Apr 13, 2019, 3:03 AM

I see Fashion Valley more of the design/high end retail center... much more expensive brands are located there.. it’s been called the rodeo drive of San Diego... which is a bit silly in comparison but I get it

Fashion Valley has limited itself mostly to fashion/clothes.

UTC is becoming a more encompassing center of high end retail with notable fine-dining restaurants and home design stores, some of which are flagship locations that are the only SD County locations.

For example, Crate and Barrel left FV some time ago and they built a large flagship store at UTC.

UTC has Room and Board, a large higher end home store that’s only located, usually with one location, in large metros like NYC, SF, etc.

As mentioned, Design Within Reach is coming to UTC, will be the only SD showroom.

Across from Room and Board is a huge high end appliance kitchen/bath remodeling store that carries brands like sub-zero.

They are building an Equinox gym, the high end chain popular in LA and NY with only one other location in SD (in Solana Beach).

It really seems like UTC is becoming the “it” place for modern high-end retail beyond clothes in SD.

In other large cities you see these types of high end retail downtown (think Chicago’s Michigan Avenue), but I think the person who said it’s probably due to the concentration of high end jobs in the area is right.

In any case, having UTC connected by the trolley will only continue to bolster the area, I think.

I wish downtown would have more mid-level retail though, like an urban target and that kind of thing. Hopefully it will come in the C-street corridor.

And yes, Manchester Gateway should have high end retail, but I think it’s going to be more boutique smaller scale, nothing like the major flagship stores UTC is luring

aekrid

Apr 13, 2019, 3:57 AM

Agreed. How is this is best use of this space in this location?

Found a couple more renderings on Twitter:

https://live.staticflickr.com/7907/33719063598_2f1c1f1d76_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/7899/47543009132_f2387f206d_z.jpg

https://twitter.com/RealPortfolioSD

While I share the same sentiment that it is too short for the location. It's likely that the foundations cannot support anything taller. The original plans for the One America Plaza complex called for a 15 floor hotel on the site. It's designed to minimally impact the parking garage below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJpDc5eTzRE

sandiego_urban

Apr 13, 2019, 4:53 AM

If it’s true there are discussions going on, that itself is encouraging. It seems like for the last many decades it’s just been an accepted reality that we would have a plateau skyline and no city officials cared to think about changing it.

Is this reliable though? This is the first I’ve heard that any serious discussion was even happening
We can only hope that the three groups are talking.

sandiego_urban

Apr 13, 2019, 5:02 AM

Fashion Valley has limited itself mostly to fashion/clothes.

UTC is becoming a more encompassing center of high end retail with notable fine-dining restaurants and home design stores, some of which are flagship locations that are the only SD County locations.

For example, Crate and Barrel left FV some time ago and they built a large flagship store at UTC.

UTC has Room and Board, a large higher end home store that’s only located, usually with one location, in large metros like NYC, SF, etc.

As mentioned, Design Within Reach is coming to UTC, will be the only SD showroom.

Across from Room and Board is a huge high end appliance kitchen/bath remodeling store that carries brands like sub-zero.

They are building an Equinox gym, the high end chain popular in LA and NY with only one other location in SD (in Solana Beach).

It really seems like UTC is becoming the “it” place for modern high-end retail beyond clothes in SD.

In other large cities you see these types of high end retail downtown (think Chicago’s Michigan Avenue), but I think the person who said it’s probably due to the concentration of high end jobs in the area is right.

In any case, having UTC connected by the trolley will only continue to bolster the area, I think.

I wish downtown would have more mid-level retail though, like an urban target and that kind of thing. Hopefully it will come in the C-street corridor.

And yes, Manchester Gateway should have high end retail, but I think it’s going to be more boutique smaller scale, nothing like the major flagship stores UTC is luring
And then there's the complete overhaul of Costa Verde Center, across the street from UTC. My inside source says they are adding more creative office space and keeping the same amount of retail, rather than increase it. The boutique hotel is still a go.

http://costaverdecenter.com/our-vision/#3

http://costaverdecenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/REG-CVC-FACT-project-fact-sheet-031418.pdf

sandiego_urban

Apr 13, 2019, 5:08 AM

While I share the same sentiment that it is too short for the location. It's likely that the foundations cannot support anything taller. The original plans for the One America Plaza complex called for a 15 floor hotel on the site. It's designed to minimally impact the parking garage below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJpDc5eTzRE
I'd be ok with the height if the design was unique. Right now it looks like an old Vegas hotel or a hospital.

Will O' Wisp

Apr 13, 2019, 5:32 AM

Without getting everyone's hopes up, could the City, FAA and City Council really be in discussions to increase the 500ft height limit? We need answers.

I haven't heard anything about this, and I'm in a position where it would be at least a little odd for such a huge change not to reach me through the grapevine. I'm meeting with someone next week who would definitely have to be involved in these negotiations for them to have even a scrap of credibility, I'll get back to you.

In any case there's a massive stakeholder missing from these reported talks, and that's the California DOT. They're the ones who actually set the 500' limit, and as a state level agency their rules override SD's local regulations. In addition, the FAA lacks any enforcement powers off-airport so there's nothing at the federal level to override them. Without the CA DOT or at least some leaders from the CA state government all this will amount to is SD asking polity if they can have the height limit removed, which they already have several times in the past and been denied.

True, but they also sell e-books 🤷🏻♂️ and libraries still exist. Some people like myself still love having a hard copy.

The city government is actually in the process of building/expand several libraries across the city due to increased demand :D

While I share the same sentiment that it is too short for the location. It's likely that the foundations cannot support anything taller. The original plans for the One America Plaza complex called for a 15 floor hotel on the site. It's designed to minimally impact the parking garage below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJpDc5eTzRE

Wow that video takes me back....

I remember pre-great recession there was a plan to build a 400'+ tower on the site. Maybe that entailed digging up the parking garage though, in which case this shortened height makes some sense. Looking from the video it seems the only major change in the design was the deletion of the top two stories of spire for a restaurant/pool.

Still think we've be better off digging up the whole site and starting fresh.

Steadfast

Apr 13, 2019, 7:20 AM

Oh man... a downtown Urban Target would be absolutely wonderful! I can't count how many times I've had to run up to SP to pick up something from there...
East Village, HP or C Street would all be great locations (as long as it didn't cannibalize the DT Ace Hardware)!

staplesla

Apr 13, 2019, 5:07 PM

Without getting everyone's hopes up, could the City, FAA and City Council really be in discussions to increase the 500ft height limit? We need answers.

https://live.staticflickr.com/7861/46680538345_0b276ed3ee_z.jpg

This was discussed on CBS 8 last night. Apparently Mayor Faulconer is looking into it and he’s declared himself a YIMBY. Though they reported a lot of NIMBY’s are raising a fuss over the proposed change. So, it’ll probably come down to who barks the loudest.

CaliNative

Apr 13, 2019, 11:06 PM

This was discussed on CBS 8 last night. Apparently Mayor Faulconer is looking into it and he’s declared himself a YIMBY. Though they reported a lot of NIMBY’s are raising a fuss over the proposed change. So, it’ll probably come down to who barks the loudest.

The NIMBY's have 2 choices: either allow greater building density and more affordable housing and shelters, or have camps of homeless living in their neighborhoods.

Will O' Wisp

Apr 14, 2019, 12:20 AM

This was discussed on CBS 8 last night. Apparently Mayor Faulconer is looking into it and he’s declared himself a YIMBY. Though they reported a lot of NIMBY’s are raising a fuss over the proposed change. So, it’ll probably come down to who barks the loudest.

Falconer can look into whatever he wants, but ultimately this isn't his or the city council's decision to make. This isn't about -imbys or making noise, it's about about standards and enforcement authority. The only opinion that really matters is the one I've yet to see mentioned: Caltrans. Per the California Aeronautics Act:

Permit for Extension of Structure More Than 500 Feet Above Ground
21656. No person shall erect or add to the height of any structure within the boundaries of this state which will result in a structure that extends more than 500 feet above the ground on which such structure rests until a permit therefor has been issued for such purpose by the department. This section is not applicable to the construction of any structure if the Federal Communications Commission is required to approve the height of the structure or if the height of the structure is required to be approved under the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (Public Law 85-726; 72 Stat. 731).

Also:

Hazards Near Airports Prohibited
21659. (a) No person shall construct or alter any structure or permit any natural growth to grow at a height which exceeds the obstruction standards set forth in the regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration relating to objects affecting navigable airspace contained in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 77, Subpart C, unless a permit allowing the construction, alteration, or growth is issued by the department.
(b) The permit is not required if the Federal Aviation Administration has determined that the construction, alteration, or growth does not constitute a hazard to air navigation or would not create an unsafe condition for air navigation. Subdivision (a) does not apply to a pole, pole line, distribution or transmission tower, or tower line or substation of a public utility.
(c) Section 21658 is applicable to subdivision (b).

Caltrans has stated, in the past, that they will not issue permits for structures taller than 500' if they penetrate a FAR Part 77 surface. KSAN is a Category D airport with a Non-Precision Instrument Approach on Rwy 27 (the runway end facing downtown). This means that the Part 77 horizontal surface extends in a radius of 10,000 feet, measured 200' along the extended runway centerline, at a height of 150' feet. In downtown this surface extends roughly to Petco Park. Extending from this is the Part 77 conical surface, which angles upwards at a 20:1 slope. Then the conical surface takes 4,000 feet to rise up from the 150' of the horizontal surface to 350'. Finally the Part 77 transitional surface rises up at 7:1 for another 1,050' until it finally reaches the 500' level. So Caltrans has said in effect that they will refuse to allow any building taller than 500' within a 15,050' radius (2.85 miles) of KSAN, or any closer than the base of the Coronado bridge. And as you can see, they have absolute authority to do that.

Nv_2897

Apr 14, 2019, 1:51 AM

Holland Development group are proposing a 467 foot Mixed Use highrise along one of the lots where the old courthouse used to be. I honestly kind of like the design

https://i.imgur.com/xoDA8GM.png
https://i.imgur.com/aU2zNVS.jpg

Civic SD: https://civicsd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019-01_220-W.-Broadway_Drawings.pdf

SDfan

Apr 15, 2019, 7:39 PM

Will O' Wisp

Apr 16, 2019, 3:06 AM

Can you clarify, were they talking about raising downtown's height limit over 500 specifically, or was the piece addressing his recent efforts to raise height limits in transit priority areas generally?

I haven't heard anything about downtown's height limit being raised at all. I think there may be some miscommunication going around.

And Will O' Wisp, thank you for the information on actual rules and regs for the height limit. I've shared with some friends who may actually be able to do something about this...

No one I know has heard of this thing either, so I'm inclined to think this is either a false rumor or a paper napkin idea.

If your friends are anything like my friends they like big, bright, colorful pictures to explain everything to them, and they tend to like better sources than "some guy on the internet". Luckily I've got just the thing for that:

SDIA ALUCP Chapters 1-6 (https://www.san.org/Portals/0/Documents/Land%20Use%20Compatibility/SDIA/SDIA%20ALUCP%20Ch%201-6%20(May%202014).pdf)
SDIA ALUCP Appendices (https://www.san.org/Portals/0/Documents/Land%20Use%20Compatibility/SDIA/SDIA%20ALUCP%20Appendices%20(May%202014).pdf)
SDIA ALUCP Factor Maps and Matrices (https://www.san.org/Portals/0/Documents/Land%20Use%20Compatibility/SDIA/SDIA%20Factor%20Maps%20and%20Matrices.pdf)

This is the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for Lindbergh Field, as published by the airport and adopted by the city. It defines in detail how San Diego's land use planning is effected by the airport and the state/federal rules surrounding it. Most of it has to do with noise, but Appendix E4 (page 117 of the second PDF) deals directly airspace protection measures.

Here's what amounts to a graphical depiction of my previous post, a map of the Part 77 surfaces surrounding KSAN:

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

This map only illustrates the Part 77 surfaces going up to 366.6' (the highest terrain penetration), but it's enough to get you the idea. There's nowhere in downtown you could build even a 300' structure without breaching one of the surfaces. Page 137 also has a description of the state regs I've been talking about, although I've always found their wording needlessly confusing. If a structure penetrates a Part 77 surface Caltrans won't issue it a permit for it to go over 500', that's all you've got to say.

And finally there's this, a map of the TERPS surfaces around KSAN:

https://i.imgur.com/Cp7yDEg.jpg

These are the surfaces that actually effect air travel. If one is breached the FAA needs to redo the landing procedures for aircraft coming in during bad weather, likely requiring higher visibility minimums. That's bad because if aircraft can't land on Rwy 27 they have to land on Rwy 9, but there's a significant segment of aircraft operation out of KSAN that can't take off on Rwy 9 because they can't make it over Banker's Hill. So then we've got aircraft trying to take off and land in opposite directions, which causes nightmares of delays.

Still, you can see that you could build structures up to 600'-700' in Horton Plaza without effecting air traffic into KSAN, and there are really no height restrictions on the Seaport Village area at all.

CaliNative

Apr 16, 2019, 10:45 AM

These are the surfaces that actually effect air travel. If one is breached the FAA needs to redo the landing procedures for aircraft coming in during bad weather, likely requiring higher visibility minimums. That's bad because if aircraft can't land on Rwy 27 they have to land on Rwy 9, but there's a significant segment of aircraft operation out of KSAN that can't take off on Rwy 9 because they can't make it over Banker's Hill. So then we've got aircraft trying to take off and land in opposite directions, which causes nightmares of delays.

Still, you can see that you could build structures up to 600'-700' in Horton Plaza without effecting air traffic into KSAN, and there are really no height restrictions on the Seaport Village area at all.[/QUOTE]

So what agency sets the height limit? The city? The FAA? Is the 500' height limit a law, or just an informal agreement? You say a 600 or 700' building could be built near Horton or even taller near Seaport Village that would not interfere with traffic. Where would a developer need to go to get permission or an exemption to build taller? It would be nice to have at least a few buildings well above 500' so we don't have a plateau skyline.

Nerv

Apr 16, 2019, 7:02 PM

I keep thinking about a episode of Air Disasters that commented once about San Diego’s airport that having either a airplane in trouble or flying in bad weather flying over one of the 10 largest cities in the country full of high rises is a bad idea on any day. I’ve never heard the details spelled out about other options that the FAA has picked with its flying lanes but I have heard comments there are some but I’m guessing money and convenience probably trump safety?

Either way IMO the FAA today is a joke after their recent “issues” with their Boeing “relationship” and aren’t really all that interested in safety. Pretty bad when even past FAA management piles on the current players at FAA.

Anyway that’s my rant. Lol

I expect nothing less than 500 footers in SD into the future and when a plane finally plows into one expect the pilot to get the blame and not the idiotic flight paths that were picked by the FAA. :(

mello

Apr 16, 2019, 9:15 PM

It seems we keep getting Ooh and Aah renders but no shovels in the ground. Does anyone have any idea when some of these towers will come to fruition?

I checked that Minto Company that has had their 8th and Broadway tower approved for 2 years now builds tract housing in South Carolina and Florida, not really sure if they have ever built a tower in a major city...

What is the timeline on the Holland Courthouse redo? I can't wait to see what JMI proposes for that lot D behind Petco could that possibly try to go higher than 500 feet?

Will O' Wisp

Apr 17, 2019, 5:47 AM

So what agency sets the height limit? The city? The FAA? Is the 500' height limit a law, or just an informal agreement? You say a 600 or 700' building could be built near Horton or even taller near Seaport Village that would not interfere with traffic. Where would a developer need to go to get permission or an exemption to build taller? It would be nice to have at least a few buildings well above 500' so we don't have a plateau skyline.

The 500' height limit is officially set by Caltrans, a state level agency. The limit can best be described as a policy, a standard set by a regulatory agency delegated jurisdiction over the issue.

You are required to get a permit from Caltrans if a proposed structure is either (a) taller than 500' or (b) the structure penetrates one of the Part 77 surfaces I've previously described. Caltrans has said repeatedly over the past several decades that they will issue permits for one, or the other, but will not issue a permit for both on the same structure.

The state law which gives Caltrans this authority preempts any local laws enacted by San Diego. The federal government has declined to give the FAA authority to regulate building heights, possibly because such an action would be an unconstitutional power grab from the states, and so there is no federal law to preempt Caltrans' policies.

SDfan

Apr 17, 2019, 3:29 PM

The 500' height limit is officially set by Caltrans, a state level agency. The limit can best be described as a policy, a standard set by a regulatory agency delegated jurisdiction over the issue.

You are required to get a permit from Caltrans if a proposed structure is either (a) taller than 500' or (b) the structure penetrates one of the Part 77 surfaces I've previously described. Caltrans has said repeatedly over the past several decades that they will issue permits for one, or the other, but will not issue a permit for both on the same structure.

The state law which gives Caltrans this authority preempts any local laws enacted by San Diego. The federal government has declined to give the FAA authority to regulate building heights, possibly because such an action would be an unconstitutional power grab from the states, and so there is no federal law to preempt Caltrans' policies.

First, THANK YOU for the laying out the rules and regs regarding this.

Second, so a policy solution could be a state bill giving SD a narrow carve out from Caltrans regs over height limits in this very specific (downtown) jurisdiction?

Northparkwizard

Apr 17, 2019, 11:23 PM

Whoa, Two America Plaza is moving ahead?

"Date of Notice: April 17, 2019
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
As a nearby property owner, occupant, or person who has requested notice, you are hereby notified that Civic San Diego (“CivicSD”) has received an application for Two America Plaza (“Project”), a proposal for a 13-story, 160-foot tall, mixed-use development comprised of 301 hotel guest rooms, 48 dwelling units, 179 parking spaces, and approximately 25,000 square feet (SF) of commercial space located on a 65,317 SF, full block site bounded by Kettner Boulevard, India Street, West B Street, and the MTS Trolley Station
in the Columbia neighborhood of the Downtown Community Plan area. This Project will require consideration of a Centre City Development Permit/Planned Development Permit/Neighborhood Use Permit (CCDP/PDP/NUP). The NUP is required for outdoor dining areas associated with ground floor
eating and drinking establishments. The PDP is required for the following deviations to:

1. Reduce the minimum floor area ratio;
2. Reduce the minimum street wall height;
3. Reduce the minimum commercial space depth;
4. Reduce the minimum distance between a curb cut and intersection;
5. Reduce the minimum distance between curb cuts; and,
6. Allow tandem spaces under a valet parking program."

This one surprises me. Link: http://civicsd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/NOA-Two-America-Plaza-4.17.19.pdf

HurricaneHugo

Apr 18, 2019, 1:21 AM

I usually complain too much about lack of height but come on now,13 stories?!

CaliNative

Apr 18, 2019, 7:27 AM

The 500' height limit is officially set by Caltrans, a state level agency. The limit can best be described as a policy, a standard set by a regulatory agency delegated jurisdiction over the issue.

You are required to get a permit from Caltrans if a proposed structure is either (a) taller than 500' or (b) the structure penetrates one of the Part 77 surfaces I've previously described. Caltrans has said repeatedly over the past several decades that they will issue permits for one, or the other, but will not issue a permit for both on the same structure.

The state law which gives Caltrans this authority preempts any local laws enacted by San Diego. The federal government has declined to give the FAA authority to regulate building heights, possibly because such an action would be an unconstitutional power grab from the states, and so there is no federal law to preempt Caltrans' policies.

Thanks for the explanation. As you say, looks like a case can be made for some taller buildings >500 feet (maybe up to 700') in the south part of downtown near he bay, away from the flight paths. Taller buildings in UTC/UCSD area and Mission Valley also should be allowed. But NIMBYs might be a problem. No reason 40-50 story condo/apt/hotel/office towers couldn't be built, esp. near UTC where the demand is and the new trolley line is going in. Kind of a San Diego satellite downtown like Century City is in L.A. The SDSU West Village in Mission Valley on the Qualcomm Stadium site should also have some taller towers.

Will O' Wisp

Apr 18, 2019, 7:46 AM

First, THANK YOU for the laying out the rules and regs regarding this.

Second, so a policy solution could be a state bill giving SD a narrow carve out from Caltrans regs over height limits in this very specific (downtown) jurisdiction?

Yes a state bill mandating exemptions from Caltrans height regs in downtown SD would be an effective solution, but in much the same way napalm is an effective pest control solution. There are alternatives that could achieve the same goals without yanking away Caltrans' state granted jurisdiction over aviation safety.

Now the big thing here is that there isn't any law that says Caltrans can't issue a permit in these circumstances. They just choose not to. The reasons why are a bit complex. First off you need to understand that there's only 8 or so people in the entire Caltrans Aeronautics Division, which regulates the safety of hundreds of airports and heliports across California doing everything from inspecting pavement conditions to updating pilot's charts.

There's one guy who handles everything south of LA. His name is Mike, and he's very overworked.

A building that is tall enough and placed close enough to an airport requires complex airspace studies, wind analysis, glare simulations, and a ton of experts in all of those fields to go over them line by line to make sure nothing is missed. Taller building further away from an airport also need these expensive and lengthy studies. Caltrans doesn't actually have the manpower to do them, so they have to get them from someone else. The FAA is the one that conducts these studies, but even their resources are limited. They would prefer to limit the amount of them they do.

Well, downtown SD is so close to its airport that damn near every project would need one of these things. So back in the late 80s when San Diego was negotiating the current height limit the FAA agreed that anything below 500' could be permitted in downtown without the need for these detailed individual studies, and Caltrans agreed not to permit anything over 500'. The FAA was happy that they didn't have to spend thousands of dollars conducting studies every time a skyscraper was built in SD. Caltrans was happy to have a simple rule they could easily enforce. Developers were happy since they wouldn't need to wait months for the FAA to finish inspecting every little detail of their designs. The city was thrilled just to get 390'+ buildings.

And that's the way things have been for the last 30 years. Nearly every other major city's airport is far enough away from their downtown to make building 500'+ tall buildings near it unnecessary. The only other exception in California, San Jose, has an approach path that goes directly over its downtown core and so isn't going to make it to 500' anyway. This issue doesn't effect anyone but San Diego, and that means no one else particularly cares to change things.

Now if one were interested in getting this limit removed you wouldn't need to take away Caltrans' jurisdiction, which would be a controversial move. All you need to do is convince them to issue permits. If you want to go through Sacramento, you could get a state bill mandating Caltrans study the feasibility of allowing 500'+ buildings in downtown San Diego. Send them some money to hire an engineering firm, and I can pretty well tell you the answer is going to come back that there's no real reason you couldn't do it. Then the pressure is on Caltrans to justify why they're holding everything up. Of course, Sacramento isn't likely to put down dollars unless there's some form of commitment from the city that they're actually going to make use of this. But then the whole thing is just another city government asking the state to conduct a scientific study to further its economic interests, which absolutely every city everywhere does all the time. Not an unreasonable thing to ask for or get.

Nerv

Apr 18, 2019, 8:55 AM

eburress

Apr 18, 2019, 4:46 PM

I usually complain too much about lack of height but come on now,13 stories?!

On the bright side, this is one way to avoid a skyline plateau... :D

Will O' Wisp

Apr 18, 2019, 10:38 PM

Is there a rendering of this mini me building?

Are they just trying to benefit from the original building by stealing the name?

Not sure from that description that it has anything to do with the original outside of the name...

SD_Urban was kind enough to post some pics on a previous page

https://live.staticflickr.com/7907/33719063598_2f1c1f1d76_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/7899/47543009132_f2387f206d_z.jpg

While I immediately shared the same sentiment of everyone else here aekrid posted this blast from the past that shows that when they initially built the foundations for the site they were planning a similarly sized building.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJpDc5eTzRE

Building something larger would probably mean digging out the current foundations and rerouting the shared utilities with One America plaza, which I'm guessing cost too much to be worth it. That might be why all plans for taller tower always fell through.

Best I can say is that we're getting the authentic Two America Plaza, crappy 1980s level height and all.

Boatguy619

Apr 18, 2019, 11:20 PM

You wouldn't notice 2 America Plaza even if it was 500+ ft. Glad to see that eyesore block finally being built on. That part of downtown has so much density, a little space between high-rises for SD sunshine isn't such a bad thing.

Anyone know whats U/C in TJ right now? I was in Otay this morning, haven't been down to TJ in months but this tower looks like it went up quick. Around 400+ft maybe. Easily the tallest in the city. Looks like it might be near the stadium.

HurricaneHugo

Apr 19, 2019, 2:54 AM

Anyone know whats U/C in TJ right now? I was in Otay this morning, haven't been down to TJ in months but this tower looks like it went up quick. Around 400+ft maybe. Easily the tallest in the city. Looks like it might be near the stadium.

This one?

http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/sayan-campestre/34956

Nv_2897

Apr 21, 2019, 5:07 AM

The Manchester Pacific Gateway now has two cranes (sorry that the bad image quality). I wonder how many more will go up?
https://i.imgur.com/EI8fc3a.png

mello

Apr 22, 2019, 8:30 PM

The Manchester Pacific Gateway now has two cranes (sorry that the bad image quality). I wonder how many more will go up?
https://i.imgur.com/EI8fc3a.png

Well to be honest guys I have some inside information on Manchester Pacific Gateway: I have been driving Uber here and there, the other night I drove some guys that work for a large construction firm in town and when MPG came up they said Papa Doug is trying to sell the entire project??? What? I asked them why, they said "He has to build the Navy Admin Tower and he is shopping the project around trying to take advantage of the hot market."

Who knows maybe this guy was confused but he seems really well connected. This is a massive legacy project for Doug Manchester and I'm shocked that he would walk away and that we haven't heard about this in the press. I called the UT and they haven't heard about it... :shrug:

SDfan

Apr 22, 2019, 10:40 PM

Well to be honest guys I have some inside information on Manchester Pacific Gateway: I have been driving Uber here and there, the other night I drove some guys that work for a large construction firm in town and when MPG came up they said Papa Doug is trying to sell the entire project??? What? I asked them why, they said "He has to build the Navy Admin Tower and he is shopping the project around trying to take advantage of the hot market."

Who knows maybe this guy was confused but he seems really well connected. This is a massive legacy project for Doug Manchester and I'm shocked that he would walk away and that we haven't heard about this in the press. I called the UT and they haven't heard about it... :shrug:

I wouldn't be too worried about that. Manchester is in the business of developing properties, not managing them. It's his business model.

Nv_2897

Apr 22, 2019, 10:54 PM

I wouldn't be too worried about that. Manchester is in the business of developing properties, not managing them. It's his business model.

True but I heard that he wanted to manage the hotel section of the project by his own firm and be manchester hotels so I wonder if he did sell the project how would that work out?

CaliNative

Apr 23, 2019, 4:48 AM

Will O' Wisp

Apr 23, 2019, 6:03 AM

What is the height limit in the UTC/UCSD area? With the trolley going in and the good freeway access, would seem to be a fertile area for some 30-40 (45?) story buildings, condos/apartments and office. San Diego's Century City. The tallest buildings there now seem to be about 20 stories. Also will a skyscraper cluster be allowed in Mission Valley? The redeveloped Qualcomm Stadium site ("SDSU west") might be a good place to start.

UTC/UCSD: Right under the departure path from Miramar unfortunately. The military is extremely protective of their airspace, they restrict building heights all the way from Del Mar to North Park. There's a couple of corners you could get to 500', but the heart of UTC is restricted to 300' or less

Mission Valley: You could build up to 978' MSL (500' above Miramar's elevation).

spoonman

Apr 23, 2019, 4:51 PM

I believe Mission Valley is restricted (by the city, not airspace) to “the top of the Valley “ which explains how the max seems to be roughly 20 floors. Perhaps someone could confirm.

ChargerFan

Apr 23, 2019, 6:52 PM

Well to be honest guys I have some inside information on Manchester Pacific Gateway: I have been driving Uber here and there, the other night I drove some guys that work for a large construction firm in town and when MPG came up they said Papa Doug is trying to sell the entire project??? What? I asked them why, they said "He has to build the Navy Admin Tower and he is shopping the project around trying to take advantage of the hot market."

Who knows maybe this guy was confused but he seems really well connected. This is a massive legacy project for Doug Manchester and I'm shocked that he would walk away and that we haven't heard about this in the press. I called the UT and they haven't heard about it... :shrug:

For what it is worth, I work in the CRE industry and can confirm rumors/conversations about Papa Doug potentially exiting the development once the Navy offices are complete.

Streamliner

Apr 24, 2019, 7:52 PM

For a different kind of development. This has been confirmed for a few months now, but Council just approved:

SeaWorld’s tallest coaster is a go, San Diego City Council says
by Lori Weisberg
April 24, 2018
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/tourism/story/2019-04-23/seaworlds-tallest-coaster-is-a-go-san-diego-city-council-says

SeaWorld’s next roller coaster — its tallest yet — got a unanimous OK Tuesday from the San Diego City Council, which confirmed the attraction is allowed to exceed San Diego’s height limitation in the coastal zone.

The planned 153-foot-tall Mako dive coaster, planned to open next year, will easily surpass the 30-foot coastal height restriction, but SeaWorld’s master plan allows for a limited number of exemptions. In all, the plan permits an exception of up to 160 feet on four designated sites, with the Mako coaster location being one of those.

The allowed variations from the height limit stem from a 1998 approval by San Diego voters of Proposition D, which amended the city’s municipal code to permit development up to a maximum of 160 feet on the SeaWorld leasehold in Mission Bay Park.

The first waiver was for the Electric Eel coaster, which debuted in 2018. Mako will top Electric Eel by just three feet. SeaWorld describes Mako as the longest, tallest and fastest dive coaster in California, although there is only one other such type of coaster in California — the 150-foot-tall HangTime ride at Knott’s Berry Farm.

Mako is planned for a location near the Journey to Atlantis attraction in the southeastern portion of the marine park, where there currently is an asphalt parking lot and ornamental trees. SeaWorld is planning to use sky-colored paint to blunt the visual impact of the coaster’s height.

https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/20a492a/2147483647/strip/true/crop/3000x1962+0+0/resize/840x549!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2F80%2F51%2F54211a394534886561beac1807bc%2F2020-attraction-artist-rendering.jpg

A roller coaster enthusiast made this animation based on the track layout plans that have been revealed previously:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc0kxa7XdWc

ucsbgaucho

Apr 25, 2019, 5:26 PM

A roller coaster enthusiast made this animation based on the track layout plans that have been revealed previously:

Fixed your Youtube link

Jc0kxa7XdWc

Will O' Wisp

Apr 26, 2019, 7:52 AM

For what it is worth, I work in the CRE industry and can confirm rumors/conversations about Papa Doug potentially exiting the development once the Navy offices are complete.

I think at some point we're going to have to acknowledge the man is 76 years old. I wouldn't begrudge Papa Doug if, after spending the last 30 years battling to get this project under construction, he wants to spend the next few years relaxing on the beach in the Bahamas and find someone else to stress over the details of its management.

SDFC

Apr 26, 2019, 5:59 PM

I think at some point we're going to have to acknowledge the man is 76 years old. I wouldn't begrudge Papa Doug if, after spending the last 30 years battling to get this project under construction, he wants to spend the next few years relaxing on the beach in the Bahamas and find someone else to stress over the details of its management.

I drove by this morning. The Navy building's steel frame is above ground and surrounded by a Forrest of rebar columns for the parking structure well in excess of the expected base of the Navy building. Probably 4x the base of the navy building. They are making progress!

spoonman

Apr 26, 2019, 11:05 PM

^ I would think the navy building would be built ridiculously strong also. Either that, or have a sea of concrete bollards lining the complex.

SDCAL

Apr 27, 2019, 4:53 PM

Any updates on 7th/Market? I can’t believe how long this project is taking :(

Will O' Wisp

Apr 27, 2019, 11:08 PM

I drove by this morning. The Navy building's steel frame is above ground and surrounded by a Forrest of rebar columns for the parking structure well in excess of the expected base of the Navy building. Probably 4x the base of the navy building. They are making progress!

The plans on Civic SD's website make it pretty clear a single parking structure underlays the entire site. The parking for the Navy building is segregated from the rest by thick concrete walls, but ultimately there's only one foundation/underground parking lot that's all being built at once.

This isn't construction being cancelled or anything like that, in a hot enough real state market it's not uncommon for buildings to be sold before they're even completed. Once a project is permitted, financed, and under construction it's just as much a transferable asset as a completed one. You can box up the whole thing part and parcel, construction contracts included, and the new owner just sits there and waits for the work crew to finish up. There's a certain risk involved with leaving yourself liable for overruns, but being first in line for a hot new property (and sometimes, getting a nice discount) can be worth the liability. And when the MPG is finished, it's not like anyone is going to say some new company that came in for the final two years of a thirty year development odyssey is more responsible for its getting MPG built than a man who worked it all the way from the late 80s.

Will O' Wisp

Apr 28, 2019, 5:08 AM

Welp, I hope everyone here is ready for a cluster of epic proportions.

As anyone who's been following regional transit issues knows that SANDAG really screwed the pooch with TransNet back in 2004. For those who don't know, the countywide ballot approved TransNet laid out a list of infrastructure improvements for SANDAG to build (mostly freeway expansions with the Mid-Coast Trolley thrown in) and put in a half cent sales tax to pay for them. Which would have worked great, except those initial funding projections didn't take into account the 2008 recession and now there's a $10 billion dollar hole in-between the cost of voter approved list of projects and the funding available to pay for them.

What's more, new state environmental regs require SANDAG transit plans reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. This means a plan which consists mostly of building freeway lanes isn't going to fly with Sacramento. The state government is more or less mandating SD County build more transit, when with the current funding it can't even afford to build the freeways it already promised.

Anyway, after all this became clear last year the old SANDAG director got fired. Then yesterday, the new SANDAG director announced he's going to propose that they cut most of the remaining highway projects and put the freed up funds into a proposed set of transit lines. Here are the projects SANDAG is planning to cut (minus the BRT):

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/SANDAGunstarted.jpg

SANDAG's new director hasn't released any details of the new transit plan, only said they won't be new Trolley lines or buses (which he says are too slow). Previously he was very enamored with self-driving cars and hyperloop, until a team of automation experts and the CEO of Hyperloop (not Elon, some other guy) gave a talk at a SANDAG board meeting where they basically explained their technology wouldn't be a feasible replacement for SD county's public transit. Right now he's just saying that SANDAG's admin team is going to find a new form of public transit which is faster than LRT/Buses. So far the admin team doesn't even have a baseline cost estimate for this hypothetical transit system, although based on the typical cost of freeway lanes vs transit miles it's almost assured to be more expensive than the TransNet plan was.

Okay now here's where things get tricky, because most of North and East county don't have the population density or the job center concentration to make building mass transit a worthwhile endeavor. Predictably, they are not exactly happy with SANDAG overturning voter approved list of highway projects and replacing it with a mass transit system that will mainly benefit the denser Central SD and South Bay regions (a system which, just fyi, they will continue being taxed to pay for). But Sacramento passed a bill last year changing the voting powers in SANDAG from a per city basis to tallies based upon each cities population. So if the SD city and South Bay mayors can overrule them on the SANDAG board to approve the new plan, and so far both seem pretty happy with this arrangement.

Buuut a new transit tax require a 2/3rds majority on a countywide ballot, and that will almost definitely require at least some support from North and East county voters. And SANDAG will almost certainly need it, because in just about any sane world high tech transit systems cost more than miles of barren concrete. So under this plan SANDAG is currently proposing to eliminate highway improvements that would benefit North and East county, improvements that they in part voted to approve back in 2004, and then ask them to vote for a more expensive system that would mainly benefit central SD. But then, the alternative is to pray $10 billion dollars will rain out of the sky to pay for expanding our polluting freeways, and then tens of billions more to pay for a new transit system in central SD.

So far the mayors of Santee, El Cajon, Poway, San Marcos, Escondido, Oceanside, and Coronado have stated their opposition. Two of the five County commissioners have come out against, the full county board will vote on Tuesday and likely will condemn the proposal. Mayors of SD city, Chula Vista, and Solana Beach came out in favor. I suspect this will start hitting the media in the next week.

Northparkwizard

Apr 29, 2019, 3:15 AM

Will O' Wisp

Apr 29, 2019, 5:02 AM

"So far the mayors of Santee, El Cajon, Poway, San Marcos, Escondido, Oceanside, and Coronado have stated their opposition. Two of the five County commissioners have come out against, the full county board will vote on Tuesday and likely will condemn the proposal. Mayors of SD city, Chula Vista, and Solana Beach came out in favor. I suspect this will start hitting the media in the next week."

As I understand it via the new weighted vote system at SANDAG created by AB 805 makes it so if the City of SD and the City of Chula vista are both in favor of something and vote for it (because of the size of those two cities) it will pass even if all the other cities vote against it.

I mentioned that in my post. SD city and Chula Vista make up a 2/3rds majority of the county population by themselves, so if their representatives on the SANDAG board both vote for the new plan it will pass.

But that doesn't magically give SANDAG the money to pay for all this new transit. It still only has the same TransNet dollars it had before, the ones that couldn't pay for a handful of highway expansion much less a series of far, far more expensive transit lines. The Mid-Coast Trolley extension on it own is costing SANDAG $2.1 billion (after receiving 50% federal funding), which is more than the all the under construction/completed expansions of the 5,15, and 805 combined (which received token federal funding). Even assuming increased amounts of state/federal funding will be available for transit projects, SANDAG will need increased funding just to match those outside dollars.

And that's a problem because while the SANDAG board voting system functions as though if a city's representative votes for something that's the exact same as 100% of that city's voters approving it, tax increases require an actual countywide ballot. Even if the majority of voters in SD city and Chula Visa do end up voting for a new transit tax, it's unlikely that 100% of them will both turn in their ballots and approve the new measure. That means getting funding for this new plan requires at least some level of support from North/East County.

That's why we're seeing both sides gearing up for war here, both have positions of strength. SD and Chula Vista can halt all future highway projects countywide in favor of increased transit, but to pay for that transit they need the support of North/East county (who have less to gain from transit and more to gain from highway projects) for a tax increase.

HurricaneHugo

Apr 29, 2019, 6:53 AM

Wait, so all of those projects were in the pipeline and now they're all being cut?

Will O' Wisp

Apr 29, 2019, 7:46 AM

Wait, so all of those projects were in the pipeline and now they're all being cut?

Coronado voted to against the tunnel a while back so that one was already defacto cancelled, but the rest were definitely planned. The 5 freeway express lanes have even completed their environmental review. But to quote the new SANDAG director, "I will not bring a project to this board that increases Vehicle Miles Traveled". The presentation included a diagram that showed an extension of the trolley all the way to Oceanside and 'transit lines' that paralleled every major freeway from SR-67 to the 905 along the border, and assurances that this new transit system would be faster and better than anything in SD today.

I'm all for transit, but this whole thing isn't sitting well with me tbh. We're not being told what this wonderful new transit system is, or how it can be so much faster than cars/buses/LRT that no one in SD county will need a car anymore, or even how expensive it will be (although everyone seems to be in agreement it will be more expensive than the projects it replaces). My Gadgetbahn (http://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/) senses keep tingling...

SDFC

Apr 29, 2019, 1:48 PM

Article on the UT about the SANDAG proposal.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/transportation/story/2019-04-26/sandag-proposes-historic-rail-expansion-while-cutting-long-promised-highway-project%3f_amp=true

Streamliner

Apr 29, 2019, 5:11 PM

The presentation included a diagram that showed an extension of the trolley all the way to Oceanside and 'transit lines' that paralleled every major freeway from SR-67 to the 905 along the border, and assurances that this new transit system would be faster and better than anything in SD today.

I don't like the idea of a LRT to Oceanside, or really any long-distance LRT. I think it's better to add heavy rail for these longer distances, maybe radiate transit corridors out into various suburbs a la the COASTER. I think the FTA just loosened its regulations so we can buy more fuel-efficient rolling stock similar to what is seen in Europe or Asia.

In general like the idea of halting these freeway-widening projects, but our region isn't built to accomodate much else. You're right, this does look like a clusterfuck.

mello

Apr 29, 2019, 8:46 PM

The 52, 78, and 56 definitely need to be widened. Who was the idiot that designed the 56 as a 4 lane highway? That should have been 6 from the get go.

San Diego's job centers are so sprawled out and with out geography of canyons, hills, escarpments, lagoons, Mira Mar military base etc I really need to see what SANDAG's plan is before I can envision transit really taking hold outside of the core of central San Diego (La Mesa west to Old Town and south to National City).

San Diego is just so sprawly and hilly I frankly don't see how transit is going to work in many areas.

SDCAL

Apr 29, 2019, 11:12 PM

Will O' Wisp

Apr 30, 2019, 3:28 AM

I think this bold move by SANDAG is good. San Diego thrives on not rocking the boat and being overly cautious and it hasn’t gotten us very far. Maybe a radical approach is good. Let’s face it, if we keep widening freeways we will have to keep widening them indefinitely. There will always be people who are scared of new ideas. But at some point something bold needs to be done if we are ever going to change course.

As a counterpoint, I'm in favor of a bold new approach and yet the way this change is being messaged is really starting to come across as discriminatory against North/East county, and that's really going to work against it. In some of the news articles I've read SANDAG has started coaching this 'no freeway projects' mandate with the exception that managed toll lanes count as transit projects, since they can be prioritized for BRT. The 5 and 805 expansions were only supposed to consist of these managed lanes, but the SR-52, SR-56, and SR-67 expansions were planned to include free use general purpose lanes. So SANDAG is still open to giving the City of SD up to $14 billion for expansions of the 5 and 805, yet spending just $700 million to expand the 8, SR-54, and SR-56 is right out. And everyone knows that's because the City of SD has just under 50% of the vote on SANDAG's board.

It begs the question, is it worth pissing off such a large section of SD county's population and risking the failure of the entire thing at the ballot box for an already comprised plan that still lets the City of SD expand its freeways and whose main thrust seems destined to be reliant upon unbuilt and unproven technologies? When a few adjustments to the old plan could bring it back under the state mandated greenhouse gas targets, and would have a far less risk come election time?

Nv_2897

May 1, 2019, 11:30 PM

I was at Bario Logan and it looks like they started to test out the lights for the coronado bridge
https://i.imgur.com/ifj2m2S.png

JerellO

May 2, 2019, 1:27 AM

i was at bario logan and it looks like they started to test out the lights for the coronado bridge
https://i.imgur.com/ifj2m2s.png

fucking. Finally.

spoonman

May 2, 2019, 1:49 PM

Looks great. Get’r done.

Streamliner

May 2, 2019, 3:34 PM

Awesome, I don't recall what the final design ended up looking like. Are they lighting the span or just the supports?

JerellO

May 3, 2019, 9:32 AM

Awesome, I don't recall what the final design ended up looking like. Are they lighting the span or just the supports?

I believe just the supports, with the tallest 4, where ships pass through, being lit in gold.. almost like a gate for them to pass thru while the rest of the supports will be in blue. If you google Coronado bridge lighting and look at the images they should pop up.

Streamliner

May 3, 2019, 3:42 PM

I believe just the supports, with the tallest 4, where ships pass through, being lit in gold.. almost like a gate for them to pass thru while the rest of the supports will be in blue. If you google Coronado bridge lighting and look at the images they should pop up.

You're right. It looks like they've just been testing different lighting techniques, ending today. I'm curious what it looks like from downtown - I was always a bit afraid this lighting package would get washed out from afar.

https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/coronado-bridge-to-light-up-this-week-as-part-of-lighting-study

ucsbgaucho

May 3, 2019, 7:52 PM

embora

May 5, 2019, 2:46 PM

Ahhh, Chargers colors... just in the nick of ti.... oh wait.

Hahaha! :haha:

Here's a UT article with some images of the bridge with colored lighting: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/tourism/story/2019-05-03/coronado-bridge-sneak-preview-of-it-partially-lighted-up-in-a-kaleidoscope-of-color

Northparkwizard

May 5, 2019, 6:45 PM

Two America Plaza drawings. https://dcpcsd.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/two-america-plaza_drawings_04.22.19_reduced.pd (https://dcpcsd.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/two-america-plaza_drawings_04.22.19_reduced.pd)f
https://i.imgur.com/UlyHPET.jpg

220 W Broadway drawings. https://dcpcsd.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/220-w-broadway_drawings_05.01.19_reduced.pdf
https://i.imgur.com/m2aJ4JU.jpg

HurricaneHugo

May 8, 2019, 1:55 AM

What's going on with the "Delta District", aka the former SPAWAR complex?

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/story/2019-05-02/what-should-the-navy-do-with-spawar-site-usd-students-have-a-winning-plan

Is this a real competition or just a concept?

Streamliner

May 8, 2019, 3:16 PM

Schmoe

May 8, 2019, 5:41 PM

This was a student competition, so it's just a fun exercise.

Although a few years ago when the subject site for the competition was Seaport Village, one of the teams' proposals had some eerie similarities to the eventual real-life winner. So you never know where good ideas can come from. The judges for these student competitions are local developers, after all.

HurricaneHugo

May 10, 2019, 7:57 AM

El Cajon Blvd getting a dedicated bus lane:

https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/20190508_pilotprogrambusonlylaneelcajonblvd.pdf

clubtokyo

May 10, 2019, 2:06 PM

Nice updates!

Will O' Wisp

May 11, 2019, 2:13 AM

In the continuing saga of the SANDAG shitstorm, the Board of Executives meeting today ended with one of the County Board of Supervisors storming out of the building. That's going to make for some fun headlines tomorrow I'm sure.

For those of you following along, last Tuesday the County Board voted to oppose any attempt to reallocate TransNet funds from highway projects to transit, as everyone expected it to. That added a great deal of fuel to the growing media firestorm surrounding the new SANDAG regional plan, and kicked off the resistance into high gear. Supervisors Desmond and Gaspar have successfully set themselves up as the leaders of the opposition movement to SANDAG director Ikhrata. The following Monday (this Monday) both of them held a press conference in Solana Beach with a couple other North/East county leaders calling on him to change direction. For those of you perhaps less familiar with politics, this is the equivalent of painting war marks on your face and thrusting a spear in the air. They didn't even tell the rest of the Board they were going directly to the media like this, a pretty big no-no when you're part of a supposedly unified regional planning organization Supervisors Desmond and Gaspar plan on campaigning against this like it's election year in Iowa.

They might've been dismissed as extremists (as many people have), but then Director Ikhrata decided to hold a press conference of his own the next day (this Tuesday). I'd argue that was a bad idea in itself, he'd be far better off silently playing the high road and leaving the commissioners looking combative and difficult to work with. But then he went out and said that opponents to his plan just want to kill all transit and only expand freeways, in violation of state law and that the SANDAG board gave him a unanimous vote to make these changes. The issue begin this isn't, strictly speaking.... true. The entire point SANDAG's opponents holding the press conference in Solana Beach was to give them that nice backdrop of the 5 and the Coaster being expanded, along with the restoration of the lagoon. They're preaching a "balanced plan" that includes both highways and transit, in a manner that quite frankly sounds very similar to what Ikhrata was telling the Board when they gave him the mandate to make changes to TransNet.

So today instead of a meeting where just Desmond and Gaspar are pelted for diving outside the SANDAG board to disparage an unbuilt plan in front of the media, now they both attacked Ikhrata right back for blatantly misrepresenting their positions and the rest of the SANDAG board is struggling to figure out if the more copacetic things Ikhrata told them in the past were true or not. The Mayor of SD was pointedly silent, and the Mayor of Chula Vista is now calling for both sides to come together and work things out. Everything came to a head during the regional housing report, where SANDAG stated cities connected to rail transit would be mandated to build more housing then those that wern't. When Supervisor Gaspar exclaimed that the most expensive land in her district is that next to the rail stations, and that she believed housing built there would be priced far outside what her current constituents could afford, Ikhrata basically replied that wasn't SANDAG's problem. So she stormed out of the boardroom.

Honestly at this point I'm not sure who to support, and I don't think the rest of SANDAG's board does either. The whole thing gets worse all the time.

superfishy

May 11, 2019, 8:07 AM

Game of Thrones San Diego edition

SDCAL

May 11, 2019, 4:09 PM

Isn’t Gaspar up for re-election? Maybe she’ll lose and a more transit friendly supervisor will be elected?

I heard the make-up of her district puts her re-election in jeopardy

SDCAL

May 11, 2019, 4:10 PM

Updates on 7th and Market?

That parking lot is still functioning, no signs of that site being prepped at all.

Any word on the funding

Will O' Wisp

May 11, 2019, 7:51 PM

Isn’t Gaspar up for re-election? Maybe she’ll lose and a more transit friendly supervisor will be elected?

I heard the make-up of her district puts her re-election in jeopardy

You're correct on both accounts. Gaspar wants to make this an election issue in her district, that's why she's been particularly outspoken and combative. Desmond is a climate change skeptic, he opposes increased taxation for transit on general principle. Their nakedly partisan tactics have the rest of the SANDAG board up in arms, with multiple North/East county leaders at taking offense at claims they represent their constituents' views.

But Ikhrata keep floundering his attempts to deal with them. The SANDAG director is a board appointed position, that means Desmond and Gaspar are technically Ikhrata's bosses (along with the other elected leaders on the board). His role is to bring together the conflicting demands of his bosses into a single workable plan, not to pick sides and attack people. It's bad optics and makes forming any sort of consensus that much more difficult. Even worse, his double talk between the board and the media is surrendering the moderate position to his opponents and starting to alarm his would-be allies. Ikhrata has in the past and continues to tell the board that no details about his plan have been finalized, and that his plan will provide "a balance between roads and transit". Then to the media he's said that his plan definitely won't provide any roadway improvements, and dismissing his opponents with a different view of that balance as wanting to pave over every square inch of SD with freeway lanes. Desmond and Gaspar are too smart for that, they're going to propose a fairly close split in funding between freeways/transit and Ikhrata will be left looking like a radical anti-car activist.

So instead yesterday's meeting consisting of a re-affirmation the SANDAG's board's commitment to a sweeping new vision, as Ikhrata desperately needed, it devolved into a mudfest of the pro and anti-Ikhrata camps mutually accusing each other of playing politics while the rest of the board silently questioned if such a progressive plan could ever gain consensus in historically conservative San Diego. The power players, the City of SD and Chula Vista, are now calling on both sides to come together for some sort of compromise. That's a loss for Ikhrata already, any agreement with Desmond and Gaspar is going to leave his visionary plan that much less visionary, but the lukewarm show of support from his strongest potential allies throws doubt on his ability to push revolutionary and controversial new transportation concepts through SANDAG's board, to say nothing of the voters.