More stuff on Ballpark Village:

http://civicsd.com/meetings-and-even...g-council.html

If you read the item #4 document, the design team for civicsd is primarily concerned about the uniformity of the project. The lack of a diversity in scale and height (pretty much three quarters of the project is 85 feet, 6/7 stories, concrete-base w/ wood structure on top) could overwhelm the area in terms of massing. They're trying to push the developer's architects into thinking outside the "box" - as in, the boxes they're proposing at this moment.

What happened to the Ballpark Village that is rendered at that Architecture office on Third and Ash downtown? That has three towers with a really nice design. This current proposal looks like shit and why only 390 feet? That is weak :shrug:

For those not familiar the office has models of a development right behind Petco you can see it right through the windows even if office is closed. I walked by there yesterday evening.

I am sure the developers would love to build three 500 foot towers.

But they would probably go out of business building so much unoccupied space.

:help:

http://kfmb.images.worldnow.com/images/22981368_BG1.jpg

Parking ban may be hurting business inside Balboa Park

Posted: Jul 31, 2013 1:02 PM PDT
Updated: Jul 31, 2013 1:02 PM PDT
Video Report By Jeff Zevely, Reporter - bio | email



SAN DIEGO (CBS 8) - The debate over removing cars from Balboa Park's Plaza de Panama is still alive. Museums in the park say the controversial move to make the plaza pedestrian-only is creating unexpected problems.

Peter Comiskey, the director of the Balboa Park Cultural Partnership, has told council members that an early closing of the bridge would have had a "devastating impact" on museums in the area.

Parking spaces have already been removed from the plazas and replaced by tables, chairs and umbrellas. Traffic runs through a narrow path between the bridge and the parking lot behind the Spreckels Organ Pavilion.

The mayor's office has dropped plans to close a bridge that carries vehicle traffic over state Route 163 and into the center of Balboa Park before Caltrans begins a seismic retrofit project early next year, according to a city report presented to the San Diego City Council Tuesday.

Filner's plan to shut off traffic on the Cabrillo Bridge on weekends and holidays this fall -- part of his plan to remove cars from the Plaza de Panama and the Plaza de California -- had been opposed by neighbors and leaders of park cultural institutions.

Council President Todd Gloria said the idea of closing the bridge before or after the Caltrans project has both supporters and critics.

The delay in the bridge closure gives "additional time to work with the community to figure out how to maybe implement this in a way that hopefully the majority of folks will support."

The changes in the plazas made to date have been positive in increasing their use, but have also made it difficult for large trucks to reach area museums and limited access to the disabled, Gloria said.

According to city staff, disabled parking spaces that were moved out of the plazas are being re-installed in the nearby Alcazar Gardens parking lot. Also, trams purchased by the city to move people around the park should be ready for use by the end of summer.

Francisco Estrada, the mayor's liaison to the City Council, said the city will monitor the number of visits to park cultural institutions, and count cars going through the park, and make adjustments to their plans if necessary.

Yea took the flight back as well and it was oversold so It seems the service is successful. Had a long layover before my commuter flight back to LAX so took the opportunity to walk around all my old haunts downtown. Loved to see the new library building and the County Admin Center Park finally starting.

This guy, Bill Adams at UrbDeZine, really has it out for us here at SSP: :(

I was going to post a comment for this article, but I couldn't find a function for it. So, I will reply here instead.

Firstly, this is a forum for people who like high-rises and skyscrapers. So, I guess I am less than shocked that there would be people here who advocate and support high-rise and skyscraper development. That portion of the article basically attacks us for what we openly support, as if doing so reveals some deep secret. In reality all it does is a) point out the obvious and b) alienates fellow urbanists. But hey! Who likes building coalitions these days anyways?

Second, I think it might be reasonable for us, here at Skyscraperpage (notice the word "skyscraper" in the title name, might give someone a clue as to what our prerogative might be), to be upset when mid-rise developments take away the very, very, very limited real estate in this region (San Diego County) where high-rise development can occur. I don't know if Mr. Adams is aware, but downtown is the only place in this county where high-rises of this size, density, and scale can be built. It's not like we have options here, good luck getting anything over three stories built in the rest of this metro.

To be fair, I do agree with Mr. Adams in that mid-rise development is not bad, and that street walkability and the urban dynamics of a community are not linked exclusively to high-rise development. In fact, these types of projects should be replicated throughout the urban neighborhoods of the city, where high-rise development should not occur.

However, as we are a community of skyscraper aficionados on a forum for skyscraper fans, I think we can agree that our disappointment here at SSP should not be surprising, nor belittled. Especially given our already limited opportunities. I mean, when less than one half of a percent of the total area in this county is available for potential (as in possible, as in not guaranteed, as in maybe) high-rise development, and that land is used to build another 5 story, concrete base-wooden frame structured project... well, I think Mr. Adams might better understand (and maybe appreciate) our frustrations here at SSP better.

In just, this guy is coming off as a jerk, especially after asking us the favor of signing his petition to halt the destruction of "historic" structures for parking spaces. I mean, make an argument, but don't belittle a community of hobbyists with no actual power other than a keyboard and an opinion.

I don't know how you all feel, but that's my two cents.

Your comment is fair and appreciated.
 

SD Fan: Thank you for your even handed, civil, rational, well thought out criticism. I really mean that! Your's is a fair and rational response to my article. I don't mean to belittle skyscraperpage forum by any means. It was mentioned only to highlight the fascination with skyscrapers in the country. The main target of the article were places like Dubai or Chinese cities building super high rises while without any focus on its citizenry. I also challenged the notion that mid-rises are inferior to high rises in the creation of an urban environment. I do not think that high rises and great urban streetscapes are mutually exclusive. However, I do think that cities that put skylines ahead of streetscapes and urban fabric often create inferior urban environments. I also don't think that high rises are appropriate in every community and that increased densification generally works best if its done incrementally and with some scaling to existing structures. In San Diego, we've allowed too much demolition for surface parking lots and too much emphasis on whole block projects rather than infill. Some of this is driven by minimum parking requirements (another area more progressive cities are looking at peeling back - its a form of auto transport subsidization). I continue to enjoy and agree with much of the discussion on this forum, especially from well thought out and civil arguments such as yours. Thanks for listening. P.S. regarding your inability to leave a comment on the site, was it not letting you register? It has aggressive (sometimes overly) anti-spamming software. Let me know if I can assist with registering.

Ahhh. LA and San Diego. Two of the greatest cities on earth. I love seeing all this developments and proposals for these two amazing cities. That ballpark village looks nice. Is that kind of like an L.A. Live?

It looks a but like LA Live, especially given that it is across the street from a sporting venue (Petco). That said, I don't believe there has been an overwhelming emphasis on making it an entertainment venue, as Gaslamp already
dominates downtown's entertainment options.

The UT is reporting that BallPark Village is now 36 floors and 402 feet?!?

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/...?#article-copy

The port is redoing its master plan and some interesting projects could make the list including an offshore airport! http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/...nfrastructure/

Has anyone been by the sites of 15th & Island, or Ariel Suites to see the progress. I would imaging Ariel Suites is topping out, and 15th & Island is starting to come out of the ground. If anyone has or can get pics, please post.

I sit like 20' behind that model.... lol

:haha: @ offshore airport!

LA once proposed a massive off shore island for their airport. It would've spanned from Marina del Rey north towards Santa Monica with tunnels bridges and trains servicing it. It would've absolutely ruined one of the best stretches of coastline in LA.

Just imagine Malibu's awesome view of the airport....:koko:

LA Live has a JW Marriott and a Ritz Carleton.

Our Ballpark Village will probably get a Homewood Suites and a Travelodge.

*sigh* :(

I agree infill projects and letting an urban core grow organically instead of trying to force density with whole-block developments does create a better street-level experience.

But there is also something to be said for the distance-view skyline images which often define a city to those who have never been. I'm worried our skyline looks too much like a plateau. It seems as though a lot of developers are trying to run up to as close to 500 ft as possible, creating a monotonous skyline view. I think having one or two 600-800 ft towers would definitely break up the plateau look and make our skyline more dynamic.

On the subject of mid rises and high rises I may be alone but I'm more concerned about what a project looks like vs it's height.

Yeah, I completely agree we need more height but having a few more iconic looking structures regardless of their height or what they are is of equal or higher importantance to me.

I know we aren't getting any structures over 500 feet near the airport so the best chance for that happening is probably someplace like utc or Chula Vista or wherever so I'm over worrying about that. I look at downtown as having certain needs not yet filled (if you ever lived there you probably know what I mean) and having cool projects that will contribute to its ability to have more energy that will get more people wanting to move downtown.

Great downtowns are about having a great energy and buzz when you walk around town with lots to do. Our downtown is getting better but it needs more moving parts...

Broadstone project at 5th & Thorn
 

Walked by there today and took a couple pictures. The excavation is mostly done and some forms and rebar has been placed at one of the lowest elevations. No renderings have been posted at the site.

1.
http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/San..._20130808a.jpg

2.
http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/San..._20130808b.jpg