SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (
-   City Compilations (
-   -   SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2 (

JerellO Jan 21, 2017 4:04 AM

I love Horton Plaza :(

mello Jan 21, 2017 4:56 AM

Horton blows, does Westfield actually own the land the mall sits on? It should be sold to a Chinese Billionaire for a mega mixed use ego project. Modern and sleek something to put SD on the map! Like Brickell City Center in Miami but with better design. Or maybe something like MGM City Center. We need something to really knock peoples socks off. :yes:

Lipani Jan 21, 2017 7:48 PM

^ Hardly anyone would disagree that Horton Plaza needs at least a massive renovation. It served a good purpose in downtown for several years, but has failed to adapt to the changes in retail. Losing Nordstrom's clearly hurt and Macy's, like many anchor stores, isn't doing very well lately.

As far as I know Westfield owns the land. Then there are several other properties that would have to be worked around: Balboa Theatre, Horton Apartments and Golden West Hotel on Fourth; the Westin on First, etc. Personally I would love to see something that doesn't feel so claustrophobic as part of Horton Plaza's redevelopment, but other than that I'm keeping an open mind.

SLO Jan 21, 2017 9:10 PM

I think more playing off of the atmosphere, weather and lifestyle more like Paseo Nuevo in Santa Barbara would be plenty, it integrates well with a downtown and has a cool factor without being ostentatious.

JerellO Jan 21, 2017 11:04 PM

Maybe knocking down some walls to make the space more open and inviting??

Bertrice Jan 22, 2017 1:51 AM

A sports arena downtown would be epic but it will never happen.

Lipani Jan 22, 2017 3:33 AM

You never know. AEG proposed an arena as part of the Seaport Village redevelopment. They seem eager to replace the old sports arena.

mello Jan 22, 2017 7:43 PM

Are you kidding me Bertrice if the NFL is not in San Diego we are by far the largest metro area in the US with only one major sports team. There is plenty of land at Tailgate park to fit in an arena where you wouldn't have to move the MTS busyard. I have already made a lot of phone calls and the NBA will definitely be looking at SD with a downtown arena. Sacramento's arena cost 530 million.

JerellO Jan 23, 2017 1:43 AM

They can't just build over the tracks?? Let the trains be underground? I think they did that with the original Penn station in NYC to build Madison Square garden.

HurricaneHugo Jan 23, 2017 5:39 AM

MLS targeting San Diego for Expansion:

CastleScott Jan 23, 2017 6:01 AM


Hopefully one day we'll reform our land use regulations to make Japanese style regional train service a viable mode of transit between the two.
This would be great and I think something like this could happen in the I-5 corridor-since LA passed Measure M I believe something like this is almost around the corner.

SDCAL Jan 23, 2017 6:02 AM

Horton Plaza was built in the mid 1980s when downtown was still seedy and a center of porn shops and peep shows. That influenced the fortress-like design. I think any thriving downtown needs ratail, my hope is that HP stays a retail center and totally revamps and turns inside-out so you have street-level shopping.

Leo the Dog Jan 23, 2017 3:42 PM


Originally Posted by mello (Post 7686253)
I have already made a lot of phone calls and the NBA will definitely be looking at SD with a downtown arena. Sacramento's arena cost 530 million.


The Clippers lease at the Staples Center expires 2024. Staples will be 25 years old at that point. There's already some chatter in LA about the Clippers building a new arena potentially in the Westside, but imagine if SD put together a legitimate proposal to lure the Clips away, could get interesting.

ChelseaFC Jan 23, 2017 6:51 PM

Artie Ojeda ‏@ArtieNBCSD
BREAKING: First look at rendering of MLS Stadium concept at Qualcomm Stadium site. Standing by for details. #nbc7

Three investors insist no taxpayer money. Must file for MLS application by Jan 31st.

plan would also include a stake in Mexican soccer league and bring a team to play here.

first step would be to develop 30 acres of River Park, no public expense. Would eventually total 55 (same as Measure D)

have had discussion with SDSU for joint stadium "quite hopeful" about working with university.

plan would also include "transit oriented development with student focused housing."

big challenge will be land acquisition. Land needs to be assessed for fair market value "to protect taxpayers."

SDSU asked to assume half of 200-million cost. Investors will then donate their half 5 years down the road.

investors say plan would relieve city of millions of dollars of negative financial liability.

investor group and city would split maintenance costs of proposed stadium.

Investors putting pressure squarly on city council. Will gather signatures and ask city to "direct adopt" plan.

investors say city must "direct adopt". If goes to a ballot vote, they will lose MLS bid.

HUGE point here. Investors say if city doesn't direct adopt (no public vote), they back out. It will be a deal breaker.

investors say city needs to act quickly because MLS application deadline is January 31st (yeah, real fast).

SDSU response: "Have had discussions, excited about reviewing complete proposal. Our priority is having a home for Aztec football and a plan for potential student housing and research facilities."

Lipani Jan 23, 2017 7:19 PM

Wow! FS Investors put this together quickly. So far it seems to be mostly good. Per the Union-Tribune, Gensler will have a site plan available in about two weeks.

Nerv Jan 23, 2017 7:48 PM

It will be interesting to see if anything gets done with the Q over the next couple of years. Lots of moving parts to that puzzle.

San Diego State is starting to look desperate. First in earlier remarks about the city giving them some land for a stadium at the Q if the Chargers left. Second with that second prop that got shot down by voters with the city giving them the land again if the Chargers left (hidden in a convention center expansion deal. Lol). Third by offering to kick in a 100 million to the new Charger stadium deal. Now that the teams gone they are all over the place with possible deals.

I've love to see them get a stadium deal here somewhere but if the voters didn't give in to the Chargers (who had a much higher value to more voters) what makes them think the same voters are going to be fine giving them valuable city lands or a super steep discount on it?

I remember one source trying to say that 160+ acres of mission valley land was only worth about 50 million dollars. What a bargain if you can buy a 3+ acre parcel in mission valley for a million dollars. Ha-ha.

Ugh. This is only the beginning. :uhh:

mwm991 Jan 23, 2017 9:34 PM

I read some of the comments on various local media sites, i.e the UT. I'm actually surprised, well kind not, that there are some negative responses to this proposal. People forgetting that there is actually no public money being spent on this. I think conservative folks just like moaning for the sake of moaning sometimes.
  • Buy the 166-acre site from the city at fair market value, as determined by a third-party. The site has been estimated at about $50 million in its present, unimproved condition;
  • Demolish 50-year-old Qualcomm Stadium, relieving the city of the annual upkeep of about $12 million and about $100 million in deferred maintenance costs. The city still owes about $28 million on outstanding bonds;
  • Set aside enough land for an NFL stadium to be built in the next five years if another city’s team wants to relocate and replace the Chargers, assuming the Chargers do not change their minds and want to move back;
  • Pay the projected cost, previously estimated at about $50 million, for a 55-acre San Diego River Park on the south side of the property;
  • Cover the costs of offsite traffic improvements associated with the development, as determined in an environmental analysis to accompany the citizens initiative, as well as onsite infrastructure site development costs with details to be laid out in coming weeks; and,
  • Invite other developers to build housing, including about 800 beds for SDSU students, 10 percent of the remainder for low- and moderate-income renters; office space for SDSU and other tenants, including a possible million-square-foot corporate headquarters; and related commercial and entertainment uses on the remainder of the property. The overall hope is to develop a transit-oriented development tied to the existing trolley line and one planned along Interstate 15.

To clarify you get a brand new mixed use stadium. An open door for an NFL team to return. Green space. Transport infrastructure improvements. Additional amenities for the local university. Opportunities for other various commercial use. Oh, and not a penny spent by the tax payer.

I am disgusted! Jesus. :rolleyes:

ChargerCarl Jan 23, 2017 9:37 PM

Demolish it, slice up the land into smaller properties, up zone it, and auction it off to the highest bidder.

I mean we are suffering from a housing crisis right?

The Flying Dutchman Jan 24, 2017 5:55 AM

A measly 800 housing units on 55 acres? WTF. That's less than one house per acre. On a site with a trolley through it. Council better vote NO on this non-starter P.O.S. "Deal".

Nerv Jan 24, 2017 7:09 AM

I also wonder what the cost of razing the Q would cost too. In the past it seems to run about 15-25 million to take down a stadium but I seem to remember them wanting over 75 million to take down the Astrodome due to extra clean up costs.

Anyone know what the building height limits are in Mission Valley? I know they've proposed towers in the past in the 225-300 foot range but is there a current max limit there?

All times are GMT. The time now is 6:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.