Yeah but it took a pretty long time before it was official.

Supply and demand, plus as much open space as you will ever need. Or at least until the Colorado River dries up. :rolleyes:

But look; even the highrise development is sprawly...lol.

If this project ever gets built though, I'll be happy for them.

The site is being prepped now. Then again San Diego has had a lot of site prepping, but no results! :banana:



:(

Hello all,

Was bored and made a "Top 10" by population diagram. I threw in a bonus city. So it is actually top 11. Please excuse the mistakes.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d6...esDiagram2.jpg

You should've put One America Plaza since it's one foot taller. But it's all good, it's only a foot and still shows the height differences well. This diagram makes you appreciate San Diego's height a little more, looking at San Jose's. :(


Still sad though.

Nice job! We can only hope ;)

.

Wow...that is depressing as hell.

E, its only depressing in the same way that I'm not a major league ball player. When has anyone suggested or even thought we're a commercial powerhouse on the same level as Philadelphia, Chicago, or even Houston? I like that chart, good idea man.

Also, news from San Diego Metro's Daily Business Report on the civic center, finally some actual movement on the long awaited fantasy (we'll see if it remains fantasy):

Finally some developmental news.


I'm glad to hear the Little Italy news. I'm still wishing for Embassy 1414 though. :(


That Civic Center news is great. Now if we can just replace the County Courthouse.

If that civic center concept ever gets off the ground, they damn well better do a good job with the architecture.

I thought I read somewhere Phoenix has a 500' limit like SD - guess I was mistaken

Sad, sad, sad at the prospect Phoenix could start building taller buildings.

I think I saw a proposal for Sacramento that is >500' too

we will be known as Shorty SD pretty soon :(

Phoenix's downtown area is more directly in the flight path of planes heading into PHX. That doesn't seem to make sense that Phoenix can go that high but San Diego can't. :shrug:

here is an older article I found, they must have made some allowances for taller buildings

It pisses me off that Phoenix's mayor was actively (and apparently successfully) looking at ways around the height limit, such as dividing the core downtown into sections instead of putting a blanket height limit that results in a plateu-like skyline like we are seeing here, why the F can't our CRAPPY leaders take the same actions and at least explore??? What's the harm in asking the FAA if >500ft structures east of Petco Park pose a problem?

Phoenix may change building height limit
Plan seeks to protect Sky Harbor flights

Ginger D. Richardson
The Arizona Republic
Sept. 12, 2005 12:00 AM

Phoenix is changing the rules that govern how tall downtown buildings can be in an effort to better protect flights into and out of Sky Harbor International Airport.

The proposed changes, which are still under discussion, could actually allow taller high-rises in some areas of the city's core while reducing height in others. But it's likely that in most areas, the height of structures will be capped at 40 stories, roughly the height of Bank One Center, downtown's tallest building.

"That really is our controlling factor," Aviation Director David Krietor said. "We don't want to build anything that would make it worse." advertisement




The situation poses a unique problem for Phoenix because it marks the first time that two of the city's top priorities have collided.

Sky Harbor, a massive economic development engine, has always enjoyed a privileged position in which its desires came first. But in recent months, Mayor Phil Gordon and the City Council have put billions of public dollars into downtown redevelopment projects in hopes of revitalizing the city's core with hundreds, if not thousands, of full-time residents.

In many ways the effort appears to be working, and that's the problem. Interest in downtown living has skyrocketed, with many developers proposing residential condominiums up to 50 stories high.

All the talk is making the airport nervous.

"All around Sky Harbor is of concern to the Federal Aviation Administration and should be of concern to the city of Phoenix," said Jane Morris, special projects administrator for the Aviation Department.

"Our role at the airport is to look at all of the factors that affect us."

Most of downtown is not in Sky Harbor's flight path. Instead, the concern stems from the fact that some of the proposed developments, if built, could force the FAA and the airlines to change emergency takeoff and landing procedures.

Those procedures are a complicated set of rules and technical guidelines, but the basics are this: On the rare occasion that one of an airplane's engines would fail, there are mandatory actions a pilot must take to land the aircraft safely.

The actions could involve deviating from standard flight paths and are further complicated by such factors as ground and air temperature, aircraft weight and rate of ascent.

An increase in the number of tall buildings around the airport would make it more difficult to get airplanes to the ground safely in emergencies.

The FAA, which works with the airlines to set the procedures, cannot control whether a high-rise is built, but it will make a ruling on whether the building poses a potential hazard.

Such was the situation several years ago when a plan to build the Arizona Cardinals football stadium in Tempe was scuttled because of its height and proximity to the airport.

In most cases, when the FAA rules that a proposed structure poses a risk, cities don't build it. But if a city opts to move forward, the FAA moves in and changes the flight procedures.

"We have to do what is right for the traveling public," said Donn Walker, the FAA's regional spokesman.

That can result in mandates that planes carry less weight in the form of fuel, passengers and cargo, which, in turn, reduces the capacity of the airport.

And that's the one thing Sky Harbor, which is among the nation's busiest airports, doesn't want.

"If there were, theoretically, a lot of high obstacles nearby, we would have to reduce the weight of our airplanes in hot weather," said Carlo Bertolini, a spokesman for America West Airlines. "We'd reduce fuel (and) cargo first, and try to do passengers last. But it would affect our operations."

The current height rules have been in place since 1971 and are severely outdated, officials said.

They allow buildings to range from 250 to 500 feet in the downtown area, with taller structures allowed along Central Avenue, if first accepted by the airport, city Planning Director David Richert said.

And although aviation officials have not worked out exactly what the new regulations will be, they do say that they don't anticipate allowing structures in Copper Square to be taller than about 500 feet, the approximate height of the Bank One Center. The building is the state's tallest.

In some areas of the core, like the Warehouse District, buildings will not be allowed higher than about 22 stories, the approximate height of the Bank One Ballpark and the yet-to-be built Summit at Copper Square condominium project.

That area, ironically, also has a special zoning overlay that is more restrictive than the airport's proposed rules. Those rules state that any building within the district, generally defined as the area south of Madison Street, from Seventh Street to Seventh Avenue, cannot exceed 56 feet, or 80 feet with a use permit. To build a taller structure, a developer needs special variance approval from the Board of Adjustment.

Gordon and others at City Hall are convinced that the proposed changes won't affect the momentum they are trying to create in downtown, even though the regulations appear to have helped scuttle at least one development plan in the downtown area: a proposed 50-story condominium tower on the site of the old Ramada Inn-Downtown.

"They can and they will co-exist," Gordon said. "There's this theory that says, to be a great city, you have to have great downtown skylines. And while I agree that downtown should have the highest buildings in the city, not every building will be, or needs to be, a skyscraper."

Not for me. It really does depress me. And I'm not suggesting that San Diego is a commercial powerhouse, but it wouldn't need to be to have a little more height.

Incidentally though, becoming something more than a commercial powderpuff would be the first step towards keeping this city get into the black.


GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH!

^ i dont see growth as a panacea for a citys $ problems - it can create many other problems in its stead.

good job El Güero on the chart.
i dont find that chart depressing at all (i live closest to san jose of the cities on that list - which compared to san diego is way more depressing). u guys down south are making good progress in creating a good downtown - uve come a long long way. think how far uve come compared to detroit, or even _enter city name_, texas (not to diss anyone - im sure ppl out there disagree).

just remember, a lot of places havent changed much, or if they have, not for the better
san diego is better, im sure we can agree with that

Well put!

San Diego has been experiencing steady incremental growth for many years and that is likely to continue.

Our city in general doesn't like giving the "city" money for projects or anything else, and I can't really say that I blame them. Think Dick Murphy, Duke Cunningham (Congressman, but still SD brand politician), Ralph Inzunza and many others. Many of our politicians are either being investigated, have been investigated, are in jail, or are likely to go there.

Although it wasn't specifically mentioned, I think some people here view the city gov't as not being development friendly. From what I understand Jerry Sanders and the mayors office are quite development friendly. They have tried to help along the Marriott project, Sunroad (but have had to back off a little), and they are trying to get a new office building. It's granola eaters like Donna Frye that try to block development (healthy urban development usually) at every corner.

Donna Frye courtesy of EBurress
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/...ryptdvd250.jpg

Donna Frye should choke on a cow dick.