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)

Prahaboheme Feb 22, 2014 8:12 PM

I actually think Ballpark Village will be one of the more iconic designs over the past several years to rise. So many of the new residential highrises subscribe to the "glass and balcony" look without much effort placed in the aesthetic look of the building.

Chapelo Feb 23, 2014 1:09 AM

La Jolla Centre III (Irvine Company) progress, Feb 19.

http://i.imgur.com/8oPGNqjl.jpg?1

spoonman Feb 23, 2014 3:47 AM

^ Nice, Chapelo.

Bertrice Feb 23, 2014 4:11 AM

Belmont park is adding a new rest/bar and rooftop bar.
and zip lines! finally zip lines!

https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/...93766701_n.jpg

http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos...ebf11d604414e5

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2...-belmont-park/

tyleraf Feb 23, 2014 5:11 AM

Thanks for the photo Chapelo. Chargers are proposing a Downtown Stadium Spanos/NFL 400 million City sells Sports Arena and Qualcomm sites. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10...tive-la-market

Derek Feb 23, 2014 8:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyleraf (Post 6464295)
Thanks for the photo Chapelo. Chargers are proposing a Downtown Stadium Spanos/NFL 400 million City sells Sports Arena and Qualcomm sites. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10...tive-la-market


Why on earth does every single thing have to go to the voters?

Northparkwizard Feb 23, 2014 1:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek (Post 6464404)
Why on earth does every single thing have to go to the voters?

Agreed, if that ESPN article holds water the Chargers have a serious international player involved now that wants to get a deal done soon. Also, the Q and Sports Arena property sales would dwarf the 400M private equity investment on a new city owned stadium.

Who's to say AEG or someone else doesn't buy the Sports Arena site and build a better venue.

Let the free market figure this one out.

Leo the Dog Feb 23, 2014 5:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyleraf (Post 6464295)
Thanks for the photo Chapelo. Chargers are proposing a Downtown Stadium Spanos/NFL 400 million City sells Sports Arena and Qualcomm sites. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10...tive-la-market

If it comes to a vote, I vote NO.

Quote:

While keeping tabs on things in Los Angeles, in San Diego the Chargers proposed a plan to build a $800 to $900 million, football-only facility downtown east of Petco Park -- home of the San Diego Padres -- that could seat as many as 70,000 for Super Bowls.
Football only in the East village will create a massive dead zone, further isolating and walling off potential growth in what's probably the most booming neighborhood in SD right now.

Chapelo Feb 23, 2014 5:44 PM

It really should be placed where the Murph is today. It's been said before, but there is already the infrastructure and the roads to support the stadium there. I'm not sure why downtown keeps coming up, traffic is already bad going downtown, and placing a stadium there is just going to make things worse.

Not to mention not being able to tailgate, plus all the other events the parking lot is used for, like the Big Three Swap Meet this weekend, the RaceLegal events, etc. Those sort of revenue generating events would be able to continue.

PadreHomer Feb 23, 2014 6:56 PM

Because a downtown stadium would look BEAUTIFUL and the views would be PHENOMINAL.

It has to go to the voters to have legitimacy. The area where the bus yard and tailgate park is would be perfect.

Bertrice Feb 23, 2014 7:37 PM

I thought the redevelopment money attached to that parcel was gone.
My guess is the property around EV will help developers but more so at sports arena and Q site. Cha Ching . just make sure the taxpayers fork over the majority percentage plus infrastructure costs.

SDCAL Feb 23, 2014 9:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog (Post 6464634)
If it comes to a vote, I vote NO.



Football only in the East village will create a massive dead zone, further isolating and walling off potential growth in what's probably the most booming neighborhood in SD right now.

Agree. I would rather Qualcomm was redeveloped into a mixed-use inclusive of a new stadium. As someone who lives in EV, I will vote no on any move to bring the stadium downtown for the reasons you mention.

Derek Feb 23, 2014 9:03 PM

By booming, do you mean dozens of storefronts that have been vacant for 5+ years?

Northparkwizard Feb 23, 2014 9:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek (Post 6464849)
By booming, do you mean dozens of storefronts that have been vacant for 5+ years?

Yeah, and the booming parking lot and bus depot which a new Stadium would replace. Look the fact is that if the Q site was still on the table it would've been discussed, it's not. I tend to agree that the Mission Valley site is the best place for the stadium but there's nothing you or I can do about it. They've chosen another site, so we can just forget about that. The City will eventually sell the Mission Valley site when the Chargers move into a new facility here or somewhere else. The Spanos' and their partners haven't even given any fine details of the deal and many people have already made up they're minds.

The free market is playing out right now and if it didn't need to come to a vote the deal would be all but done. It would be easily the largest project ever downtown, which I think we can all appreciate. The positive economic impact would also be gigantic.I haven't seen any other developer try and take a stab at the site and they won't because they know better than to get in the way of the biggest fish in the pond.

I was against Petco when it was introduced and I have to admit that my worst fears were never realized. I think with the right architects and engineers, the East Village site could be monumentally awesome.

Bertrice Feb 23, 2014 9:47 PM

New clairemont shopping center. but NIMBY's stopped the in-n-out. lmfao

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ikcrk7tJgg...+capture_2.jpg


http://blog.clairemont.com/2014/02/b...tores.html?m=1

Puzzlecraft Feb 23, 2014 11:58 PM

Broadstone project at 5th & Thorn
 
As of February 23, 2014 looking southeast from 4th & Thorn.

http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/San...n_20140223.jpg

eburress Feb 24, 2014 1:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bertrice (Post 6464913)
New clairemont shopping center. but NIMBY's stopped the in-n-out. lmfao

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ikcrk7tJgg...+capture_2.jpg


http://blog.clairemont.com/2014/02/b...tores.html?m=1

San Diegans really are the worst! Who cares if there was going to be an In-n-Out? It's not like that part of town is Beverly Hills or something.

Leo the Dog Feb 24, 2014 2:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek (Post 6464849)
By booming, do you mean dozens of storefronts that have been vacant for 5+ years?

No, I was referring to just the tower cranes erecting the massive buildings in the neighborhood.

aerogt3 Feb 24, 2014 8:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog (Post 6464634)
Football only in the East village will create a massive dead zone, further isolating and walling off potential growth in what's probably the most booming neighborhood in SD right now.

Yeah, I prefer the stadium not be built, so we can enjoy the lively urban core provided by the empty parking lots and bus yard.

If the stadium would be a "dead zone," I'm curious what you call the space it would occupy right now.

tyleraf Feb 24, 2014 4:41 PM

I just received an email back from Lankford and associates concerning Lane Field. They plan to break ground in early April.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7372/1...75f7e9f4a2.jpg


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.