![]() |
Stumpy Legend
Why didn't they make the Legend Taller?? At only 24 floors it barely clears the scoreboard and lighting structure of Petco so only the top 6 floors have great southerly views. They should have made it a 38 to 42 floor tower. I really don't see it being that marketable with only a handfull of units getting a great view to the south.
Plus it doesn't give the people inside the ballpark a dramatic view of a highrise since it only sticks out a little bit above the lighting stand. BOSA pussed out on the Legend lets admit it :yuck: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
What the legislation means is that the weight/pressure of the current population can no longer influence the creation of no growth or slow growth measures on a city wide basis. Each city is now responsible for where must those additional numbers be located and the type of housing to be planned. So, whether San Diego slow growth citizen's like it or not (like Donna Frye?), SD is to grow. As I understand it, because I am kinda a newbie to SD, is that city entities selected downtown as one of those areas where future populations should be located. |
Quote:
On the bright side, I am glad that the city had the foresight to do what they could to encourage downtown residential growth. Like I said before though, now they need to follow up by doing what they can to encourage corporate expansion (spelled: n e w a i r p o r t). People need places to work. ;) |
City Probably would not let Bosa go higher
I think bosa only did 24 floors on the legend because that is all he was allowed to do. If you look at all the buildings going up touching the ballpark they are of a relatively similar height. Even the portion of the omni right across the street is stepped down. So I think that means there was a height limit on the buildings right next to the park. Maybe they were afraid of shadows on the stadium. Further evidence of a height limit is the fact that the next block down from the legend all has proposals and buildings that are much higher, the new mixed use complex, cosmo square, and the mark.
|
holy cow...the game was intense!! i had great seats too...section 131:tup:
anyways, i have to disagree, i think The Legend and Diamond View and Omni, Park Terrace, ICON etc...all look great with the surroundings...and im hoping Cosmo Square, Library Tower and the new main library (fingers crossed on all three...) can tie everything together into a beautiful community |
So I have been thinking the past couple days how I dislike the chain-link fences on the I-5 overpasses downtown, particularly on the ones going north to Bankers Hill. And Park Blvd too. Are they on Park? I am assuming they are.
Caltrans began intalling them statewide a bit over 10 years ago after an incident or two involving people/kids throwing things off them and hurting motorists below. I think there were some deaths involved. Anyway, they are unsightly and I offer-up that they could be replaced rather easily by some nice iron wrought fencing, or something. Maybe some nice vintage street lights too. Wouldn't that look sweet? It's not like the parking decks are going to happen any time soon, are they? If done, it could add much to the romantic alure of downtown. After-all, over 100,000 cars pass under the bridges each weekday. Maybe more? People would remember them and eventually want to get off and visit downtown... not that more visitors are need... I am just saying. over SR 163 is an example. A poor example, but one nevertheless. The Laurel Street bridge in Balboa Park is an example, although bad one. |
^how about lids that cover the freeways;)
|
FYI: There was definately a cap on the heights of the buildings immediately surrounding the ballpark. I remember there was much debate about this before and during construction of the park. The developers wanted to go both fat and tall to capitalize off the location. The "public" stupidly wanted short buildings, but the developers argued that the buildings would be fat as a result, causing more issues than if they were tall. In the end the buildings ended up about as wide as the developers originally wanted, but a bit shorter.
|
the buildings dont seem that wide to me...
|
^that's the idea, they aren't as wide as they could have been :cheers:
|
gotcha:cheers:
i didnt read it right the first time... |
Quote:
|
^i thought the port restricted height down there...?
|
do you guys think the city of SD will incorporate 4S Ranch? im just curious as to what you guys think...
|
The land BMFarley is talking about isn't restricted as I understand it. That is where "Ballpark Village" was/is supposed to go. The project was to include aprox. (3) 500'-ish buildings, so I don't see how it could have any sort of meaningful cap.
|
Holy shit, US Open on Torrey Pines and the Del Mar Fair overlap by three days...
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/n...1n8delmar.html I-5 will be the world's largest parking lot for those 3 days... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I agree about Miramar, I just don't think the military will ever give it up. San Diego as we all know has no flat land left, which doesn't give us many other options. Does anyone think Montgomery may be workable? I don't think they'd have to tear down too many properties to make it work. Maybe they could run the 163 freeway under the runway, tear down that In-N-Out shopping center and a few other businesses for a paralell or cross runway.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 4:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.