So you're sick of people bitching about San Diego even though they're right? :jester:

I've always thought San Diego has a pretty weak skyline but this shot actually makes it look pretty good, like a slice of New York:

The point is not that there is anything wrong with SD in and of itself, it’s that SD is content to let itself get behind other cities when it doesn’t have to be that way. Look at Seattle, it is roughly the same size, but is thought of much more highly on a national level. I’d rather live in SD, but much of SD’s situation is self inflicted. The airport (although improving), height limit (probably only important to us geeks, but places like Austin having taller buildings is just sad and lowers SD’s stature), losing Chargers and NBA, potentially losing conventions due to ineptitude, lost leadership position in LRT, lost airline service at Carlsbad, etc. I’ve lived in a number of other cities as well, but have never seen a city mess up so completely and thoroughly. Perhaps what is remarkable is that SD is great despite all of this. But damn, this stuff is just hard to watch.

I have an answer for this: Automated vehicles. I work for a company that is developing vehicle automation, and by 2020 we will see this come to fruition. What will automated vehicles do? They will remove the need for personal cars, along with the parking lots and large roads.

What do you mean that our geography doesn’t lend us to being a tier 1 city? We have a deep natural harbor, we are on the Pacific Rim, we are on the border of Latin America. Our city has many geographical assets other cities don’t have and we should be a tier 1 city. The problem is that these assets haven’t been used to their potential.

The SD harbor is extremely shallow compared to LA's (50' vs 80') and very narrow. SD lacks a direct rail connection with the east coast and the rest of the country, meaning that all cargo entering via the port of SD has to pass through LA anyway (in the past there was a eastbound railroad at times. Nicknamed "the impossible railroad" due to the engineering feats it took to cross the peninsular range, the tracks would regularly wash out during rainstorms and were eventually abandoned). SD also has a dearth of flat developable land, and what land there is can be difficult to access due to the numerous canyons crossing the landscape, but in comparison that issue is relatively minor.

There just aren't any major avenues to propel SD upward that aren't already being tapped. Even if we kicked out the Navy, which provides for 30% of the SD economy btw, we wouldn't be able to outpace LA in trade. SD already tries to compete in service industries like SF in Tech and NYC in finance, and usually loses out to more established centers. The only thing SD could really do is double down on tourism, a finicky industry as it is already.

Does anyone know when cranes will go up on the Manchester Pacific gateway project I know they still have to demolish one more building

Man, you make it sound like SD is Shantytown. Other reports say it's going, glowing and growing.

This was from someone at Smart Corner. I don't know who from the civic board is keeping them in the loop but they seem to constantly getting information about this and other adjacent projects. Smart Corner knows its going to be losing its view on all sides eventually.

Ucsd
 

Pinnacle on the Park
 

Crane at 11th & Broadway - Pinnacle twin towers
 

Ground shot of K1 aka Library Tower
 

All in perspective my friend. SD has the largest concentration of military forces on the planet, with all the wealth of defense based industries that implies. SD is an internationally recognized leader in drone technology, biotech, and wireless communications. The beach weather is good nearly all year round, the parks/museums/zoos are world class, and SD is one of the America's top tourist destinations in any month.

SD is by no means a shantytown, our economy is growing faster than it ever has in fact, but there are limits to this growth. SD is never going to exceed SF or LA in sheer economic output, it's better to run our own race rather than try to compete in an arena we'll always lose out in.

Also joemamma, all your images you linked are being blocked by their host. Try saving them to your desktop and uploading them elsewhere before linking.

As someone who has lived in LA and SD (current and hometown), I can say that San Diego is fine... I still travel between SD and LA a lot. Just got back from the City of Angels last night actually. SD is not perfect, but I wouldn’t live anywhere else. Growing up I wanted to live in the big city with all the hustle and bustle... but as I got older that just doesn’t seem appealing anymore. San Diego is not TOO quiet, but it’s definitley not LA, thank goodness. Los Angeles has become my getaway city for the weekend. It’s become my NYC, I wouldn’t live there.. just a place to visit. But I’m actually more excited about developments going on in LA because there’s so much going on lol from skyscrapers to building more rail, exciting stuff.

I think we should be glad that we live next door to the second largest city, if we want our big city fix we can just drive 2 hours north, then come back when we’re over it lol

Would be really nice if San Diego could be included in the after hours of alcohol thingy, San Diego has a bigger nightlife crowd than some of the cities included. And especially with our military here, many from NYC and Florida, they always complain about it stopping at 2AM.

Let's keep things in perspective guys
 

Ok lets stick to facts LA Metro area is 4 times bigger than SD with a pre War Fabric maybe 4 to 5 times the size of ours. Our "urban older hoods" have a pretty small footprint. Downtown to Mission Hills out to La Mesa then SW to Sherman/Logan and National City is actually quite old on the West side. That's it! What would you guys say LA's Pre War footprint is at least 3 times that size.

So.... Of course LA and the Bay Area are going to have a lot more going on they are much bigger AND have more of a grided out Pre War footprint that has been established for 80 years and willing to add density. They will be building more infill, transit, and vertical buildings than SD just out of sheer size. Plus their traffic has been horrendous for 30 years while ours is just starting to get bad. The citizenry of LA said "DO SOMETHING" when they passed Measure R 12 years ago because the traffic was such a nightmare.

I think for our size we are doing a decent amount of urbanizing of course it could be better and it would be nice if we were constructing 2 light rail lines right now instead of just one.

Now comparing to Seattle :( Why are we lagging? Lack of corporate presence and our big industries don't locate Downtown. Seattle is the king of its region while San Diego is just the little buddy to the two Kings up North. Microsoft, Boeing, Amazon for SEA.... Qualcomm and tons of medium sized tech and biotech for us... In Seattle for some reason a bunch of their stuff gets located downtown. Could you imagine if just 40% of Qualcomm and 10% of SD County's biotech was downtown? We would have 70,000 more middle class workers downtown in about 12 million more square feet of office space...

This would mean more vibrant core and a badass skyline. So there you go guys that is why we are what we are. Overall our food scene is good, you have vibrant Tijuana just to the south and its so easy just park at Las Americas and walk across PedWest. People from all over the world love Little Italy, meet LA people there all the time and they sing its praises. Mobility is still great here its such a manageable city compared to Bay/Los Scandalous.

Good points by everyone. For clarification, I never felt like SD wasn’t a good city. In fact, I’m quite a booster. What is frustrating is the continuous misses on large opportunities not only to improve the city and its image, but even to maintain the status quo. This is more of an issue of leadership than environmental, economic, or geographical reasons. It seems that the city’s leadership has failed to sell important ideas to the public, such as sensible density, new airport, finding a way to keep pro sports, doubling down on nightlife, etc. This is a great city and is both comparable and unique at the same time when compared to LA. However, it is the leadership that continues to stand still (or move backwards) when everyone else is moving forward.

FWIW, I first visited California, in 1990, and SD was my first stop. SD was what I expected LA to be like. For whatever reason, I attached the nostalgia I had for film culture (and California) to SD. LA is another animal altogether, but SD is my "California city."

I couldn’t agree more. It’s an unfortunate irony that such a well-positioned city is so poorly managed, and it doesn’t help that much of its populace seems to prefer stagnation to growth. I’m constantly frustrated by what goes on here but despite the best efforts of the bunglers and NIMBYs, there are still occasional glimmers of hope.

I know this rendering might be off but i feel that its kind of a Bummer that the Manchester Pacific Gateway will block Pacific Gate but at least it will bring some much needed density to the skyline and, add much needed office space to SD.
https://i.imgur.com/XPSGQPT.jpg

Also does anyone know when this tower will break ground or is it a dead proposal
https://i.imgur.com/DEeFGFK.png