I suppose my only question is... is this topic the right place for this thread? I thought there was some sort of 'fantasy' forum or something. I reviewed the float.com web site... and because it is so shallow I cannot take it too seriously at all. I am afraid the idea of an ocean airport, although supported my an apparent legitimate company (???), will never float.

It is not fantasy, it's unlikely to happen in my opinion, but people are putting design ideas together with the idea it could be possible, it's not like people are desinging 1000 ft towers to show how they would look in SDs skyline knowing they can't happen. The idea of a floating airport is not new, and I heard legitimate architects talking about it on NPR back before the Miraramar vote when people were discussing options.

I admit this board has been spending quite some time on the issue, but:

(1) theres not a whole heck of a lot else going on development-wise here; if people have interesting stuff post it and our minds will wander from the floating airport

(2) the situation our city is in with regards to the airport is leading people to explore alternatives, which I think is healthy. Even if the floating airport doesn't happen maybe some of the concepts and ideas could evolve into a more practical solution

Since we will never have a skyscraper that can compete with the likes of a Sears Tower, Potronas Towers, Empire State Building, etc, and since the Coronado Bridge is nowhere near as asthetically pleaseing as the golden gate, maybe a floating airport is just what SD needs to put us on the map and be our architectural icon. If we are the first in the world to do it, it would definately make out city look great worldwide if it's a success.

Many of the worlds greatest structural achievements that are admired and looked at as icons today were thought of as being loony far-fetched wastes of time and money being proposed by a bunch of crazies by NIMBYs of days past. I guarantee a floating airport WILL exist somehwere in the world in the next 50 years (a true floating airport as opposed to the current man-made island airports in Japan), so SD can either forge forward and take the challenge or wait and have Dubai or Sydney or Osaka or some other seaside city take the plunge.

:fruit:

That's funny!

Check out this link about a San Diego area monorail...

http://www.sdmonorail.com/Routes.htm

It's a little outdated (2005), but I really like the idea! It goes out to densely populated areas that the trolley system doesn't really serve.

Here's a map of where the monorail routes would go. Notice the connection to Coronado.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d1...system_map.gif

I like the Fifth Avenue line from Hillcrest all the way down to Petco Park, but I'm not sure how they were thinking to pull that off. In Seattle, the supports for their monorail system are placed in the center median of the road, and there certainly isn't enough room to do that here on Fifth.

Floating airport???

Monorail???

Floating airport with monorail...awesome
:upload_71700:

The plan mentioned actual specifics like where the supports would go. They said they would go in the lane which is used for parking and would claim only (only?) 1 out of 4 spaces. They also mentioned the details for the Coronado route such as building a Caltrava bridge.

^Oh I missed it! Thanks for the information there. I'm totally for it though.

Here's something we missed in UTC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Loop

Yeah, I remember this episode of the Simpsons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_vs._the_Monorail

I like his description saying that "Most of the worlds monorail systems are in the Orient...". Are these trains being operated by Orientals?

21st Century thinking done by a guy with a 19th Century vocabulary.

Looks like NBC is moving closer to happening. Design-wise, it looks like something you'd see along the 405 in Orange County...:yuck:

Larger and more renderings:

http://www.ccdc.com/resources/resour...1Submittal.pdf

http://www.ccdc.com/resources/resour...s_20070702.pdf



Panel Advances Navy Broadway Plan

Downtown project OK'd amid concerns

By Jeanette Steele
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

July 21, 2007

DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO – The massive Navy Broadway project won pivotal approvals from San Diego's downtown redevelopment agency yesterday – though officials worried that it might become a playground for wealthy customers of designer shops and luxury hotels, not for the average person.

The vote by a Centre City Development Corp. committee means developer Doug Manchester nearly has an approved master plan for 2.89 million square feet of hotels, offices, shops and a museum on a premier eight-block site between Harbor Drive and Pacific Highway.

The issue must return to the agency for a formal vote next week.

Four of the seven buildings he proposes also passed the first of four stages of approvals.

But construction won't begin until after several lawsuits are settled, said Perry Dealy, Manchester Development president. The cases aren't expected to be heard until year's end.

The $1.2 billion Navy Broadway project is being driven by a 1992 agreement between San Diego and the Navy, which owns the land. The Navy gave Manchester a 99-year lease to redevelop the property, but critics have argued – and sued – saying the 15-year-old agreement is outdated.

If everything goes his way, Manchester hopes to start next summer on the project's first four pieces: a new Navy headquarters, a hotel, an office building and a twin-tower hotel and office structure.

Most CCDC board members criticized and praised the master plan yesterday.

“It's still not (supermodel) Heidi Klum, but it's not a gorilla either,” Chairman Fred Maas said.

The board particularly liked the wide outdoor terraces shown on the lower floors of some buildings, which would let visitors enjoy the weather and bay views. If there's a San Diego style of architecture, some said, this is it.

The agency had green-lighted an earlier version in November, but the developer pulled it back to tweak some aspects.

One change was to narrow the central pedestrian paseo, or plaza, to 55 feet, instead of the earlier 80 to 115 feet. Some board members had felt it needed a more intimate feel.

The loudest dissenter on the board was Teddy Cruz, a visual-arts professor at the University of California San Diego. He knocked the plan for channeling visitors into the paseo, surrounded by shops, instead of toward the bayfront.

Cruz also said the museum site, at the south end, should be next to the 1.9-acre public park on the north end. If not, Cruz said, “this park just becomes the lobby for a hotel or office space.”

He also said public agencies or arts-related groups should have been given a place. “Otherwise, this will become a shopping venue, another mall, that compromises the civic character of this site.”

Board members shared some of Cruz's concerns about public access.

The focus turned to the paseo, which Manchester revealed will be lined with high-end fashion stores. If that becomes San Diego's Rodeo Drive, it may make average people feel left out, some said.

Board member Jennifer LeSar said that means the park, which the city will develop, must make residents of all classes and cultures feel welcome.

San Diego's business community came out in force to support Manchester's project. “Make our front door something to be proud of,” said Scott Alevy of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce.

One of the few people voicing opposition was Bankers Hill resident Al Weiss.

“We've missed the basic question,” he said. “Do we want something for us, a present to the citizens of San Diego? Or do we just want to maximize the commercial development of this piece of ground?”

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...03/navy430.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...03/navy430.gif

I'll be there for demolition. ;)

I like the scope of the project but those renderings are uninspiring.

I also think this:

is impossible to stop. Why think that the 'average person' will be able to afford shopping here if they can't afford to live in any of the new projects going up around it?

More on that.

http://www.sandag.org/index.asp?proj...rojects.detail

I kinda agree, while not a bad proposal there is something about it that just seems bland. If it were going in somewhere else downtown I would be all for it, but it just doesn't seem to live-up to it's prime waterfront location. While I fully support density and skyscrapers well over 500ft in San Diego, I think the immediate waterfront area shouldn't be boxed in and should have something less "bulky" and something more distinct and innovative that could be encorporated with park or interactive space. I mean hotels, condos, yadda those are everywhere, the waterfront should have something more unique and open. But, on the other hand, if the choice is to have the Navy Broadway Complex or the hideous outdated buildings that exist now I'll take the NBC proposal

I have been complaining for 4 years now that we need something to link uptown (Hillcrest, North park, Bankers Hill, etc) with downtown, i am so glad to hear people are at least thinking about it. It always seemed rediculous to me that you can take the trolley out to East County but not up the hill to Uptown. I know the density, Balboa Park, etc make it very challenging to build, but with the development going on downtown and the development going on in uptown, I think connecting the two with some sort of mass transit would really make our overall urban center seem larger and more vibrant. As it is now, I feel like if I go into Uptown it feels like I'm going into a seperate city

RE: NBC

When I saw the latest renderings after reading the article this morning I couldn't help but wonder how in the hell NBC's project design is getting worse as newer renderings come out. I now find myself longing for the original rendering that I irresponsibly derided. Tilt-up anyone? My only hope is that street life there is activated enough to divert your eyes from anything above ground. (And building one, the hotel/office tower is fine, but how do they manage to refer to the other hotel as spanish colonial?) Its like Gensler saw Cobb's Irvine Co. tower and said, "you call this a box?"

If anything, a subway should be build going through all the inner city neighborhoods up to SDSU, as there isn't really room for above ground rail transit (except for an above ground monorail, which is actually pretty cool).

What really blocks the waterfront are superblock projects and the damn trolley and train rails. Those low-rise condo's+Pantoja Park+the trolley lines are whats messing up the access to the bay. The trolley line screw up the street grid and allows only about three streets to connect to Harbor Dr. I wish the city would quit talking about stupid park projects at the embarcadero and underground those tracks along harbor drive. Maybe projects like NBC could be tweaked a little to improve access by changing the perception of traffic, but I think the three causes I mentioned are the real problems.