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)

HurricaneHugo Nov 30, 2013 7:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyleraf (Post 6357214)
San Diego's Olympic bid is gaining steam. Even Fulton has been talking about the potential benefits it would have on the city. Also, next week the County Board of Supervisors will decide whether to endorse the effort. http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/nov/27...ors-committee/

If it includes a new Chargers stadium then I'm in.

NYC2ATX Nov 30, 2013 8:02 AM

One thing you know is going to skyrocket to the top of the priorities list if they are awarded the games is a new or substantially upgraded airport. ;)

Prahaboheme Nov 30, 2013 4:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StatenIslander237 (Post 6358125)
One thing you know is going to skyrocket to the top of the priorities list if they are awarded the games is a new or substantially upgraded airport. ;)

One that should include a direct rail connection to downtown!

aerogt3 Dec 2, 2013 7:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 6355346)
Up until this year, there were a few basic reasons why SAN did not have more direct long haul service. Runway length and terrain were the main reasons, as even with the possibility of high passenger demand, many long haul routes could not be profitable with weight restrictions necessary to take off from SAN.

BA to LHR shows that it was possible before this year.

I don't get the obsession with direct intercontinental flights - they are available to a very small portion of travelers. The reality is that even taking off from SFO, I am always making a connection anyways. There are direct flights to 2 german cities, populated with about 7 of 82 million people.

For the entire continent of Europe, and about 500 million people, SFO offers direct flights to 7 cities. Honestly, SFO is only better than SAN if you're traveling to one of them and want to pay a much higher ticket price (seriously, the cheapest direct flights between SFO-FRA or SFO-MUC is way way higher than the cheapest non-direct.)

It goes something like this: spend billions > build new airport > have a flight connection anyways.

aerogt3 Dec 2, 2013 7:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist (Post 6354970)
Correct, but the land currently used by Lindbergh could then be redeveloped. I assume this land is very valuable.

It's not valuable in the billions. And it would be expensive to tear down the airport, too. Relocate all the rental companies, develop transit to central SD, etc. The trolley doesn't currently connect SAN to downtown, but it's a $10 cab ride (or $2.50 by bus) and it certainly won't cost that much to connect them.

A new airport with a functioning link to SD would be many billions, and not much benefit. There are SO many better ways to spend several billion dollars than to fix something that's not really broken.

Urbannizer Dec 2, 2013 5:01 PM

India and Beech Tower - Saw this for SD while looking around for another project. Dunno the location.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7328/1...0f2d347b_b.jpg

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2817/1...877aae82_b.jpg
  • 28-story apartment high-rise
  • 159 units; 731 square foot average
  • Mechanical parking system

http://www.humphreys.com/portfolio/on-the-boards-6/

Derek Dec 2, 2013 5:08 PM

That looks like Long Beach or something. We unfortunately don't have that kind of waterfront park.

spoonman Dec 2, 2013 7:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aerogt3 (Post 6359694)
BA to LHR shows that it was possible before this year.

You are correct in that BA's SAN to LHR flight uses different equipment than the 787 (they use 777). The reason I didn't count this tough is that the same 777 going to Tokyo would face heavy weight restrictions (making it unprofitable) due to much greater Jetstream headwind (when it is going east), and slightly further distance. For flights like this, the 787 provides fewer restrictions, and greater profitability.

tyleraf Dec 2, 2013 9:20 PM

It's India and Beech. The place just makes their renders with a lot of green space added.

Derek Dec 2, 2013 10:35 PM

Holy crap! I see the County Administration Center now. I wish it actually looked like that...

Northparkwizard Dec 2, 2013 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbannizer (Post 6360007)
India and Beech Tower - Saw this for SD while looking around for another project. Dunno the location.
  • 28-story apartment high-rise
  • 159 units; 731 square foot average
  • Mechanical parking system

http://www.humphreys.com/portfolio/on-the-boards-6/

I like it, however I don't know what a mechanical parking system is... wait. I just googled it, cool. Will this be the first mechanical parking system in Downtown?

SDfan Dec 3, 2013 12:33 AM

India and Beech... so pretty!

SDfan Dec 3, 2013 1:02 AM

Urbannizer, where did you find these renderings?

spoonman Dec 3, 2013 1:08 AM

Yeah, that building looks great.

Derek Dec 3, 2013 1:35 AM

That's another reason I didn't think it looked like San Diego at first....



San Diego doesn't get towers that look that nice. :haha:

Urbanize_It Dec 3, 2013 2:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 6360176)
You are correct in that BA's SAN to LHR flight uses different equipment than the 787 (they use 777). The reason I didn't count this tough is that the same 777 going to Tokyo would face heavy weight restrictions (making it unprofitable) due to much greater Jetstream headwind (when it is going east), and slightly further distance. For flights like this, the 787 provides fewer restrictions, and greater profitability.

Stronger headwind heading east from San Diego than east from England? Ok, fine. FYI dirct flight on Japan Air to Tokyo started...um today. There is one reason, and one reason only, for the limited direct international flights from SAN, demand. Sorry, it is just the reality of the situation.

spoonman Dec 3, 2013 2:49 AM

The company developing India & Beech is also developing 11th & Broadway. I'm usually not a fan of twin towers, but this looks sharp.

http://martinezcutri.com/projects/11th-broadway/

spoonman Dec 3, 2013 2:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbanize_It (Post 6360773)
Stronger headwind heading east from San Diego than east from England? Ok, fine. FYI dirct flight on Japan Air to Tokyo started...um today. There is one reason, and one reason only, for the limited direct international flights from SAN, demand. Sorry, it is just the reality of the situation.

Yes, and guess what aircraft JAL is using...a 787. They had to use a 777 for a few months when the 787's were catching fire, and they were weight restricted due to the runway and terrain.

Everyone knows that SD would not be a major hub due to geography and competition from other cities, but many believe that there would be MORE international flights with a better airport, both due to the runway and additional facilities. Some have pointed out (aerogt) that building a new airport may not be worth getting a few additional flights. This math would have to be taken into consideration as well as the remaining lifespan on SAN, future demand, taxes derived from additional flights, consequential economic activity, etc. It may not pencil today, but I know many might argue that the airport will have to be moved eventually. It's hard to have this discussion without knowledge of the numbers, but as skyscraper fans, most would like to see the airport moved if there is any possibility that makes sense.

Do with that whatever you want.

HurricaneHugo Dec 3, 2013 5:44 AM

India & Beech would look perfect at 500 feet!

aerogt3 Dec 3, 2013 7:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbanize_It (Post 6360773)
There is one reason, and one reason only, for the limited direct international flights from SAN, demand. Sorry, it is just the reality of the situation.

Econ 101.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 6360786)
but many believe that there would be MORE international flights with a better airport, both due to the runway and additional facilities.

This really isn't the case. There are 15 airlines with the 787. Only one operates it to SAN. Airlines aren't flying to SAN because of the runway or facilities. They aren't flying to SAN because the planes would be empty.

FYI, BA has 787's also, but are running the 777 to SAN.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:31 PM.

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