SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   City Compilations (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=87)
-   -   SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2 (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=126473)

SDfan Mar 2, 2016 3:11 AM

Wonderful to see the Alexan breaking ground! It'll help balance with Pinnacle out there. Wish it were a bit taller, but they couldn't with the height limit in the area.

The Flying Dutchman Mar 3, 2016 12:55 AM

Drove past the site for this today, and there was some heavy demo work being done (bulldozers, etc.) So I guess there's new activity, and possibly a ground-breaking. Good news, I hope.

http://www.sandiegometro.com/wp-cont...6th-Street.jpg

Lennar Project

Civic San Diego also approved the design and related permits for Lennar Multifamily Communities’ proposed 21-story tower and five-story mid-rise, mixed-use residential development at 460 16th St. in the East Village. Designed by Carrier Johnson Inc., the development would include 368 studio, one- and two bedroom apartments and about 19,000 square feet of commercial space. Construction would begin early next year.

http://www.sandiegometro.com/2015/10...rt-oct-5-2015/

embora Mar 4, 2016 2:59 AM

Horton Plaza Park is expected to open May 4, 2016, per this article in the SDUT.

Quote:

Horton Plaza Park opening May 4

By Roger Showley | 3:46 p.m. Feb. 29, 2016

Horton Plaza Park, one of San Diego’s most historic sites, will reopen May 4 after a $17 million makeover and enlargement, officials announced Monday.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...ton-westfield/

http://cdn.sandiegouniontrib.com/img...15c2d8bc4ecd52
Construction nears completion at Horton Plaza Park where a new amphitheater and retail kiosks will be added to the historic park. — Roger Showley

Northparkwizard Mar 4, 2016 4:17 PM

It's not really a park though is it. Calling it a park is a misnomer.

Should have moved the name Horton Square over to this. Or maybe just call it Horton Plaza and start calling the mall, Horton Plaza Mall?

Horton Public Square? I dunno man, it just ain't a park if it's just pavers and hardscape.

The Flying Dutchman Mar 5, 2016 12:49 AM

Citiplace (Front & Ash)

http://civicsd.com/meetings-and-even...committee.html

Nothing to see, really.

embora Mar 5, 2016 1:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 7358870)
It's not really a park though is it. Calling it a park is a misnomer.

Should have moved the name Horton Square over to this. Or maybe just call it Horton Plaza and start calling the mall, Horton Plaza Mall?

Horton Public Square? I dunno man, it just ain't a park if it's just pavers and hardscape.

Agreed.

Leo the Dog Mar 5, 2016 7:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 7358870)
It's not really a park though is it. Calling it a park is a misnomer.

Should have moved the name Horton Square over to this. Or maybe just call it Horton Plaza and start calling the mall, Horton Plaza Mall?

Horton Public Square? I dunno man, it just ain't a park if it's just pavers and hardscape.

Probably good that it's hardscaped, otherwise, the homeless would take over and sleep in the grass all day.

Xavier Cage Mar 7, 2016 5:11 PM

Here are some renderings of JMI's proposal to turn the Qualcomm stadium site into an educational complex for SDSU/UCSD. Also included in the proposal is a 40,000 seat stadium for SDSU football and expansion MLS soccer franchise.

http://s9.postimg.org/5qi1byzi7/Siterendering.jpg

http://s21.postimg.org/3x6wgp0lj/Qualcommsite.jpg

Images and story appear in this Union-Tribune article:

The Q: A new future post-Chargers?
By Roger Showley | 6 a.m. March 6, 2016

For months San Diego has debated the Chargers’ future and lately has focused on a 15-acre downtown site for a new stadium.

But a challenge 10 times bigger lies eight miles north: The future of Qualcomm Stadium and its 166-acre site.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...redevelopment/

The Flying Dutchman Mar 8, 2016 1:41 AM

Project Updates
 
Pinnacle buys Pacific Heights building site

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...building-site/

11th and A:
http://cdn.sandiegouniontrib.com/img...15c2d8bc4ecd52

From the U-T article:
"Last year the company opened Pinnacle on the Park, a 46-story, 484-unit rental project at 424 15th St. A spokeswoman said 187 apartments have been rented so far. A twin tower of about the same size is expected to break ground in the next few weeks on the north side of the block."

"Pinnacle previously bought and won approval for a 618-unit, two-tower project of up to 32 stories at 11th Avenue and Broadway."
"Winslow said it isn’t clear yet whether the Broadway or A Street project will be the next to break ground and if Pinnacle will continue opening its projects as apartments or switch to for-sale condos."

Build both at once, I say!

Pinnacle @ the Park refresher:
http://image.apartmentguide.com/imgr...cd2a59c86/602-

11th and Broadway refresher:
http://sandiego.urbdezine.com/files/...y_Drawings.jpg

Nerv Mar 8, 2016 6:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xavier Cage (Post 7361787)
Here are some renderings of JMI's proposal to turn the Qualcomm stadium site into an educational complex for SDSU/UCSD. Also included in the proposal is a 40,000 seat stadium for SDSU football and expansion MLS soccer franchise.

http://s9.postimg.org/5qi1byzi7/Siterendering.jpg

http://s21.postimg.org/3x6wgp0lj/Qualcommsite.jpg

Images and story appear in this Union-Tribune article:

The Q: A new future post-Chargers?
By Roger Showley | 6 a.m. March 6, 2016

For months San Diego has debated the Chargers’ future and lately has focused on a 15-acre downtown site for a new stadium.

But a challenge 10 times bigger lies eight miles north: The future of Qualcomm Stadium and its 166-acre site.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...redevelopment/



I've seen the low end value of the Q land being in the 300 millions and the higher end being closer to the 600 million mark (depending on the source and how they are interested in it).

I'm going to guess SD state is going to expect the city to give them the land on the cheaper side and lower their possible tax base income if the city decided on a different form of development on the site instead of a extended campus.

Unless they plan on paying the city a high market value for that land I say screw that and put it out there for something that can actually make money for the city.

mello Mar 8, 2016 8:52 PM

I really wish 11th and Broadway /11th A would get going soon we could really use some height and increased activity in that section of downtown. Also waiting to hear when the 7th/and Broadway project is going to move forward that one is really nice.

dtell04 Mar 8, 2016 11:45 PM

I went to the meeting at new school of architecture this past Saturday. It mainly focused on the bus yard site. There was people from all parts of downtown and bario Logan. Quigley kind of ran the discussion and group proposals were steered away from the stadium idea.
While there was many good ideas and thoughts presented to improve downtown, I kept thinking how out of touch these people were to reality. Maybe if there was a company or university willing to compete with the stadium proposal it would have been a useful meeting. With this proposed Q site development it will be hard to also try to pull ucsd or sdsu into competing with anyone for the downtown location. It was almost like the meeting was a recruitment of ideas in order to start a coalition against the convadium.
I wonder if there would be a way to have the street of the stadium (maybe 3-4 stories up as well) office/business/retail like the street level of other buildings. I think that would help with the "dead zone" created by the stadium.
I think all these bright minds and ideas at the meeting need to do a better job plugging into reality. Go/no go on the stadium or wait for a different industry to attempt to do what the chargers are doing. It could be 10 years or more before that happens.

The Flying Dutchman Mar 9, 2016 1:40 AM

Dual-branded Hilton campus to debut Summer 2016 (Old Fat City site)
 
NBC7: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loca...lowTwt_SDScene

http://cdn.sandiegouniontrib.com/img...15c2d8bc4ecd52

Streamliner Mar 10, 2016 4:49 PM

I drove through downtown yesterday - Pacific gate is about 2-3 stories above ground and is looking good. Across the street in Bosa's other lot, they've put up a sample piece of the facade. It looks good, but I did not get any photos unfortunately.

The Rey is hiding in between Vantage Pointe and the Symphony Tower. It's creating a nice dense cluster there, but not too visible from outside downtown.

Cladding on the new Courthouse is almost topped out. It looks very nice.

Bertrice Mar 11, 2016 2:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Streamliner (Post 7366134)
I drove through downtown yesterday - Pacific gate is about 2-3 stories above ground and is looking good. Across the street in Bosa's other lot, they've put up a sample piece of the facade. It looks good, but I did not get any photos unfortunately.

The Rey is hiding in between Vantage Pointe and the Symphony Tower. It's creating a nice dense cluster there, but not too visible from outside downtown.

Cladding on the new Courthouse is almost topped out. It looks very nice.

here's the rey courtesy of @sandiegostreets

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdJX_jPUsAAnbsx.jpg

HurricaneHugo Mar 11, 2016 3:11 AM

Has it topped out yet?

SDCAL Mar 11, 2016 4:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 7363928)
I went to the meeting at new school of architecture this past Saturday. It mainly focused on the bus yard site. There was people from all parts of downtown and bario Logan. Quigley kind of ran the discussion and group proposals were steered away from the stadium idea.
While there was many good ideas and thoughts presented to improve downtown, I kept thinking how out of touch these people were to reality. Maybe if there was a company or university willing to compete with the stadium proposal it would have been a useful meeting. With this proposed Q site development it will be hard to also try to pull ucsd or sdsu into competing with anyone for the downtown location. It was almost like the meeting was a recruitment of ideas in order to start a coalition against the convadium.
I wonder if there would be a way to have the street of the stadium (maybe 3-4 stories up as well) office/business/retail like the street level of other buildings. I think that would help with the "dead zone" created by the stadium.
I think all these bright minds and ideas at the meeting need to do a better job plugging into reality. Go/no go on the stadium or wait for a different industry to attempt to do what the chargers are doing. It could be 10 years or more before that happens.

I don't understand why exploring the idea of a university presence in East Village is "out of touch with reality." Are the people trying to lure an SDSU or UCSD annex to Mission Valley also unrealistic? A university plan wouldn't be something that would compete with a stadium, it would be something that could be realistically explored if the convadium fails. It's far from a done deal, it would need to pass the hurdle of a public vote. While I wasn't at the meeting and didn't hear the speakers, I personally think it makes a hell of a lot more sense to put a major university presence downtown than it does in MV. I read San Diego is the largest city in the country without a major university presence (not talking community college) in the urban core. Universities bring centers of technology and innovation and high paying jobs. There's a reason our biotech center emerged around UCSD. A university presence downtown could really synergizes with the IDEA district, city college, new school of architecture, TJ school of law, and really create a dynamic center of education and innovation in an urban setting. A stadium, on the other hand, would bring low wage seasonal jobs. It makes no sense that people think it's a good idea to move the stadium to the crowded city center and take away tailgating, and then expand our leading universities to a non-dynamic quasi suburban area like the current Qualcomm site.

The Flying Dutchman Mar 11, 2016 9:08 AM

Even if you had a Uni presence downtown, chances are housing would be so expensive that people (especially students) would have to commute anyway, just as they do to SDSU and UCSD already. The Blue Line to UCSD will be a big game-changer, besides.

It's a sad fact that all the housing built downtown is pretty much only reachable by the well-to-do or the housing voucher folks. I hate the dichotomy, but it is what it is. Even if every remaining block was built with high-density housing, the demand would still be enough to command high prices.

Given that student housing rates are higher than average than your typical rental in San Diego, that issue would only be exacerbated by building downtown in a premium locale.

That brings me to the stadium. I am not in support of a football stadium, downtown or otherwise. I think the NFL is a scam and cities would do well to stay away from them, but here we are.

I think most arguments in favor of a stadium downtown vs. a Uni presence are in favor of getting something ASAP to clean up the area, whether or not there is actual truth to it.

The real issue, in my opinion, lies with our core neighborhoods that are so adamantly against raising the housing density that we are forced to build high density downtown only, or to continue sprawl (also a no-no).

Something's gotta give, and the NIMBY folks are hoping that people will give up and move out to greener pastures. Yet the rents get higher and higher every year.

It's just one big clusterfuck.

Rail>Auto Mar 11, 2016 10:13 AM

I agree with what one of the articles said that the Q should be scaled down for San Diego State, not replaced by one next door. It's 2016, adaptive reuse of this facility to a smaller one with built in classrooms and athletic facilities shouldn't be that hard.

HurricaneHugo Mar 12, 2016 5:25 AM

The Q is really old and has leaks everywhere.

A new smaller stadium would be better.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.