That's good that you went to the meeting however I've heard some of the really disheartening things being reported on my Twitter timeline from last night. I wish I would have been there, several people had interesting accounts from it including these gems from Voice of San Diego reporter Andrew Keatts:

""Bay Park is not Manhattan" sign at town hall for mid-coast trolley up zone plan. Bkgrd: http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/04/2...lley-tensions/ … pic.twitter.com/BxLiSClary"

"So @BillFultonSD explains study option, mentions that it's limited to Morena corridor. Crowd yells "Bullshit!" And "No on 60!" (He's right)."

"23 year old said she lives with parents, wants to stay in Clairemont, but can't afford to, likes idea of cheap transportatiom options. (1)"

"Crowd booed her off the stage, heckled her all the way out. "Live somewhere else!" "Come back when you have a mortgage!" "Be Realistic!" (2)"

"Truly despicable scene there. Grown adults."


More from others:

@Vi_SD - "Individual is pro transit and alternative trans; community shouts that she should move to #northpark... #ouch pic.twitter.com/cVhjFC4cRS"

@mwstafford - "It's really sad that one of the few times a young person shows up to a community meeting they get shouted down for supporting new housing."

@ollingers - "Morena Blvd Station Study goes through Clairemont (opposed to density along transit) and Linda Vista (not opposed to density along transit)"

First steel beams installed at One La Jolla Center today.

There also appears to be a pad for a tower crane being installed.

http://i.imgur.com/Z8MzWXAl.jpg

Sorry for the super late reply mello.

In La Jolla, a small cottage was being fought over between the property owner and the La Jolla historical society. The society claimed it was historical, and opposed any redevelopment of the site. The owner of course claimed otherwise. Interestingly, the president of the historical society is also the neighbor to the cottage owner, and would have partially lost her view if a new home was constructed. The abuse some of these "historical societies" place upon their communities for their own selfish interests is shocking. I don't know the outcome of the cottage. Filner had personally intervened to block the cottages tear down back in the day, and I never followed up.

In Golden Hill (my neighborhood) the local planning group is actively trying to downzone the entire area. City Planners are trying to upzone areas around C street and Broadway, but are finding a lot of resistance from NIMBYS. I wish I had an active voice on their committee, but like many in my generation, I don't have the luxury of time or financial security to even sit in on these board meetings. I've emailed Fulton my support, however.

Uptown is trying to make the interim height limit permanent. This would make Hillcrest subject to a '65 height limit, while Mission Hills would be set at 50'. This would be a huge mistake for the urban area, but I don't know how city planners are going to fight back against the cartel that is the Uptown Planning District.

College Area is outraged over a 4-story project that was just completed on El Cajon Blvd. The "tower" is being decried as a behemoth that will bring more unwanted students and renters to their "low density" neighborhood. They are currently opposing a 5-story "high-rise" at Montezuma and College Ave, right across from SDSU and public transit options. The College Area planning group is probably one of the most ridiculous entities I've ever encountered. Up is down and right is a "skyscraper" that needs to be stopped.

And this is just a snap shot of the city. Dig deeper and it gets worse.

I emailed Fulton a thank you for his hard work, and I emailed Harris with a reprimand for the mob he allowed last night. I wish I could have gone. That poor girl is representative of so many I know.

Here is a link to the VOSD article on the events in Clairemont last night:

http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/05/0...e-us-in-peace/

Thank God.

:iagree:

Nimbys gone wild
 

Great post/rant:
http://sdurban.com/?p=8688

I really feel like he support for smart growth is here, I just am dumbfounded when I read about all the illogical opposition. Can't wrap my mind around it.

I read other cities' compilation threads and I feel the optimism, excitement, and momentum. I read San Diego's compilation thread and it depresses me. It's a real kick to the crotch.

What's funny is that Rancho Bernardo and Del Mar have taller buildings that Clairemont/Bay Park. If sold as creating the "next Little Italy" perhaps these bumpkins would be slightly less fearful of these towering 5 story buildings.

+1, the crotchety old "I got mine, so fuck you" attitude is awful.

It would be really great if all the entities deciding on this stuff weren't made to answer to this mob of special interests.

I'm not really sure I understand the opposition's view on this? Don't they know they're sitting on a gold mine? I wish I owned property in Little Italy 25 years ago....wow!

San Diego must create more housing, this is such a great opportunity with the coming of the mid-coast trolley ext.

On a more positive note, it looks like Lane Field broke ground early. The official ground breaking was supposed to be May 8, but I drove by yesterday and they're definitely chewing up the asphalt already.

On a side note, I can't decide whether I like the Lane Field hotel design or not. Modern designs scare me a little - especially when it's going to be a long-term, front-row fixture of SD's skyline. Will it look cool in 10 years? Or look like crap? Just a thought...

Other good news...11th & B will break ground next year.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/...ents-approval/

http://sandiego.urbdezine.com/files/...t-Pinnacle.jpg

I just read this article and was kind of disturbed by it.

As someone who owns a home downtown, I'm all for density, getting rid of stupid height limits, and expediting the process for developments (it's taken lane field how long to break ground!?!?)

I'm also against politicians pandering to squeaky wheels who want stop development all together.

But, I also want what we build to be of some quality and aesthetic.

I'm not impressed with Mr. Manchester's architect, nor with Manchester himself.

Manchester's primary goal seems to be his own profits, not creating world-class architecture.

I find the proposal for the UT site in mission valley to be abhorrent and sub-par.

The architecture is bland, the height is low, and the big TV displayed with a giant U-T logo on the top looks like a giant Dairy Queen.

The article even quotes this architect as being known for "the modern baroque school of kitsch." Is that the look we are going for in SD?

How, exactly, is naming this mediocre architect to this approval board going to be good for development here?

I'd rather see someone like architect Rob Quigley get the spot.

More progressive cities like Seattle seem to be getting cool density developments off the ground, but San Diego's development hopes lie with some old right wing guy who owns the newspaper and his architect?

I think if we want to attract tech sector jobs and make our city a place young professionals want to come to, we need to think a little more out of the box, younger, and edgy - and a little less "Manchester".

Anyway, that's my rant for the day. I know some may not agree with me, but I welcome the friendly debate. We all want smart growth, more density, and better transit infrastructure. I guess we can debate about the best way to go about it - and the best people to get the job done!! :tup:

^^ I'm with you SDCAL but at this point lets face it Manchester owns that land in MV and has the lease for NBC so I will take development over stagnation even if the design isn't exactly what we would want. Once his towers in MV go up I think it could bring in a rush of high rise developments for the Valley. Nothing tall has been built there in what 25 years now???

As for office market tightening downtown, if any company could build a tower without financing it would be Irvine. Any speculation on whether or not they would finance their own construction on an Iconic tower either next to OAP or right in front of it. If anyone could take down the FAA and go to 600 or 650 feet it would be Irvine.

Do you guys think they would consider it or would want to wait and get approval from a bank to finance?

Took the trolley the other day and took some pics of 10th and Broadway and I forgot the other building's name.

http://i.imgur.com/gaOjJGl.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/mm1CFBl.jpg

10th and Broadway has already made an impact on the skyline coming off the Coronado Bridge. East Village construction is starting to boom again.

Looks like the grand opening for CAC park is scheduled for this Saturday!

http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/parks/...ndOpening.html

They're probably tearing out the asphalt so they can get photos of shovels going into nice brown dirt.

Glad to see something finally go in there, but I share your wariness of the design. I wish we had more iconic, world class architecture on the waterfront. So far, only OAP seems to be in that category, and it's quickly getting hidden.

I can't wait to go down and enjoy the CAC Park. Thankfully on the front of world class architecture Pacific and Broadway is scheduled to break ground this year. Hopefully with the downtown class A office space drying up quickly, Irvine will start moving forward with 880 west Broadway, preferably with a new design as had previously been mentioned. I'm glad Lane Field is really happening I hope the second tower has a better design than the first though.