On another note, here is a link to an online petition trying to get the Uptown Planning Committee chair (Leo Wilson) to resign.
http://www.change.org/petitions/leo-...share_petition He has been the chair of the community organization for 9 years (more of an oligarchy if you ask me). He and his allies on the UPC have been against bike lanes, active transportation, and increasing housing opportunities in Uptown for nearly a decade. It's time to pressure UPC to start adopting more urban-minded and forward thinking policies in order to address the growing problems we have. Please sign and share if you care about San Diego's future! Thank you! |
Signed!
|
It's funny how none of the proposals even dare mention that the downtown Chargers stadium plan involved demolishing the historic Wonderbread Factory, a beautiful brick warehouse which houses Mission Brewery, and it would displaced 3 architecture and landscaping businesses and the NewSchool of Architecture Domus Academy Campus (they of course can move to other locations, but don't we want to preserve historic architecture)? Petcopark worked because they integrated the historic buildings into the stadium, but this Chargers Stadium just displaced everything existing there.
The worst thing that this part of East Village has going for it is the Bus Depot. It is a megablock with no pedestrian penetration. The bus depot needs to move, and be replaced with smaller blocks for residential and commercial infill. A stadium here isn't really doing anything to improve the neighborhood other than to solidify an impenetrable block as far as pedestrianism goes. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I guess my question is; is there a currently-on-the-table proposal for the area (Lower East Village) other than what we're talking about? To supplant the city owned and operated bus yard, a few small warehouses, and parking lots for Petco via some type of piecemeal multi-developer project seems far more unlikely than any stadium idea. Suggesting that the properties in question would ever be developed in that kind of cooperative way is really far-fetched, No? Since you seem to know so much more than I do about, "how land-use works". Please explain why the City of San Diego would every displace a operational bus yard for anything less than a mega-complex of some type. Furthermore, half of the property we're talking about is already owned by the private developer that ordered those renderings. I'd be very surprised if JMI and the Spanos' haven't already put a bow on this thing. My only other big question is who's going to be the corporate sponsor? My vote is for, "Dr. Bronner's Magic Soap Stadium." |
Quote:
Quote:
If that's what you want, fine, but I'm not going to call you close minded for it the way you have to people who don't share your vision for EV.[/QUOTE] First, this is just YOUR opinion. Just as I have mine. Second, I am for a diverse downtown where everything is included. I love the IDEA district, as well as, the sports complex district. I am not one to say something should not exist. Third, sports are a huge part of the culture in a city. They are not for everyone but neither are the Museums, Theater or the Zoo. To each their own but I find it closed minded when some who are not a fan of sports want to block that aspect of the cultural base. Great cities have everything. Fourth, the EV is massive. It's almost 2x to 3x the size of any other section of DT. The reason for this is that until recently, everything west of 10th and South of Broadway was a 'no go' zone. Petco Park changed this. So it's great that you love your part of DT but it seems as if you can't come to terms with how it came to be. Without Petco, IMHO, all of the development would have been focused to the West in Columbia, Core and LI. Frankly, I think the 'East Village' really needs to be redefined and broken up into 2 or 3 areas. Why not make have a 'Sports' District in the South, an 'Idea' District in the North and something else in-between? It's not like there isn't enough room. http://i.imgur.com/1oarTqd.gif |
Quote:
If you want to play SimCity..go ahead. It's not real. Downtown San Diego has plenty of room to grow for what is needed over the next 50 years. People like to cry about how not every building being constructed today is a shiny new tower but fail to understand that NOTHING is permanent. Until there comes a day, and it won't, where every single parcel in downtown contains a dense structure...it's a pointless conversation. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This stadium plan is about as compact as you can get. If located where they are suggesting, it will be surrounded by block after block of 1 story structures that will eventually be converted to high rise developments. Just because your personal taste does not find value in overlooking at stadium does not mean you get to undervalue it. Go as a Real Estate agent how much a view overlooking Petco Park goes for. Now if there were calls to prevent every. single. project. in downtown that did not follow your 'mixed-use, high-density' litmus test with the tenacity...you might have a leg to stand on but this is not the case. |
Quote:
Also, major conventions here usually use Sunday (most football days during Fall) as break-down/get-away days. Not to mention it's the least traffic congested day of the week Downtown. Other conventions outside of Comic Con really aren't a traffic/mass transit issue because of there relatively low attendance, "... fantasy fans ranked first in terms of the convention center’s attendance, far outstripping the combined total of its next four largest conventions, expected to be about 62,500 people." - NYT As far as public transportation is concerned... my #2 bus arrives on time everyday, runs on natural gas, and gets from A to B within the inner city as fast as any NYC or European bus i've ridden. Admittedly it could be much better though, we all know more light rail would help tremendously. I also signed the petition to recall Leo Wilson, as every good member of BikeSD should. |
Quote:
Yay! Again, everyone, please share and sign! |
Quote:
|
Dales5050, I don't hate sports. Your assumption that people who don't want to see a sports stadium downtown are not into sports is not correct.
I do realize sports is an important cultural aspect of the city, I just don't think having another stadium dt would be good for dt at all. I would much rather see a new stadium/mixed-use development in mission valley. I will say, however, that trends show American football losing popularity. With all the controversy about head injuries, and changing demographics that are drawing people away from American football and towards soccer, I'm skeptical football will remain as big as it is today long-term. |
Quote:
First, is the chargers-convention center proposal within coastal commission impacted area? What about the destruction of historic buildings, someone mentioned the wonder bread building which is an important historical structure would need to be demolished, I'm sure that would raise lawsuits, and rightfully so. Then, will city money be used at all? As we saw from the recent hotel tax court decision last week, any use of public funds requires a vote. Also, questions about the convention center - would this satisfy demand? Would it be a new structure and would the old one also be used? Is this proposal for contiguous convention space for large events? I haven't seen this specified anywhere. It seems like there is a lot going on here, and years of wrangling either way. |
Quote:
Downtown San Diego is not going to be Manhattan, the Loop, or even DTLA - and comparing our quaint hamlet to larger cities is preposterous. But Sorrento Valley and UTC are never going to be downtown San Diego, and it's illogical to assume these neighborhoods are going to somehow mitigate our urban growth problems in the same capacity downtown could. Quote:
Quote:
There are only 6 city blocks from the central library on Park Blvd to I-5. Keep in mind, a block downtown is smaller than a block in say Hillcrest or North Park as downtown was designed by Alonzo E. Horton with smaller blocks so alley ways would be unnecessary and they're easier to develop on. From my perspective, that's not a lot of room at all. Others (assuming you) might look out over the reading room into the EV and see endless opportunities for development on parking lots and older structures. I don't agree at all, but again, difference of perspective. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.sandiego.gov/planning/com.../agendas.shtml I'm not going to hold your hand or do your work, you can stop being lazy and go over them for yourself. These aren't etched in stone as you would like, but they are on pdfs, if that's acceptable? :tup: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I need to clarify something, while I don't believe the Chargers are as significant as they or the city claim they are economically, and while I am not an ardent sports fanatic (I have more important things to do), I do see the value in sports to the greater community. The Chargers should build a new stadium, but it should not be in EV or anywhere downtown. I wouldn't vote yes on any direct public monies for it, but I would support the project if it made economic sense (i.e. NFL, Spanos, hotel tax, tourism surcharge, ...as in I'm not paying for it) and if it was in another location outside downtown. |
Quote:
I'm not sold on much that JMI is offering, as an annex alone would be just as bad as a stadium or stadium-convention center in my opinion. :uhh: |
Quote:
I'm not sure about historic structure, but San Diego city govt has been able to deal with those types of issues before - they'll probably either incorporate Wonderbread or move it, assuming it is historical. The public vote on a tax increase is the biggest hurdle to any convention center or stadium construction. Interestingly, conservative penny-pinchers in the county may end up being the progressive EV's saving grace. And we are years away from any real movement in either direction. After the appellate court shot down the CC funding scheme, we're 3-5 years from resolution. |
I think Dale has brought up some interesting points regarding the future and where dense development could begin to take place if all of existing lots are built up in Downtown. SDfan I do like your arguments, looking at google maps "Tailgate Park" and the Bus Yard basically take up 8 city blocks combined. The Tenth Ave Marine Terminal looks to take up about 14 city Blocks. I also see a lot of land South of Imperial that could be scrapped for higher densities and better use. What is up with that big empty lot on Newton Ave for example?
As you walk around downtown you also see a lot of blocks that have measly "new builds" on them like Dale said and eventually these could be torn down to accommodate towers in the future. Also along G and Market in the Columbia district there are old builds from the late 80's/Early 90's that are only 3 or 4 floors and very suburban in Nature that could see the demolition ball in the next 20 years or so. I think there is a middle ground that will eventually be reached, look at how the tide of NIMBYism eventually changed and now San Francisco is seeing a lot of construction in the city. National City could step up and really provide a lot of new housing units as well as the Chula Vista Bayfront and they are very close to downtown. Regarding UTC being built out who controls that giant piece of land just east of the 805 and on the North side of Mira Mar road? It looks to be about 140 to 160 acres of flat land? That could be turned in to a shit load of housing units and eventually the furniture stores could be scrapped and turned in to housing on Mira Mar road as well. There are always options for finding new areas to construct housing. |
Boy what a great way to spend time waiting for a flight reading the discussions. I live in the EV as well, but don't understand how not building the stadium will help in the long run. The city owns over 7,000 pieces of land. Why would the bus yard ever be sold or developed into anything other than something for public use?
It just seems like the real question is bus yard or football stadium. I agree it would be great to eventually live AND work DT, but realistically unless you work for MTS or the chargers (maybe) no one will have a job on that site. Park and market could be built with office space, in the EV. The makers quarter complex could be built with office space. If (fingers crossed) the Salvation Army sold their almost 3 blocks of land that would be a game changer as well. I personally would like to see a football stadium in the EV. I don't think it should be viewed as something that would ruin the non-existent planned development of our beloved bus yard. The debate should really be titled: maintaining a bus yard bounded by homeless people or build something to put downtown SD higher on the national stage. |
Quote:
That's how mediocre urban areas get built, by settling. I'd rather have more organic development take place, even if it's slower and even if it means the bus yard remains longer - again I'm thinking long-term. The choice is not a stadium or a bus yard. A stadium would probably take half a decade or more as things go, to assume the bus yard is there for eternity is simply ridiculous. |
Quote:
This could very well be the case. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 3:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.