*eeeeeeyyyyeeerooooooooollll*

As for the HSR between Dallas and Ft. Worth, that's cool.

HSR will never go from LA through OC down to SD. Why? Because NIMBY's on the coast killed it before they even proposed it. HSR will come to SD, but we'll all be dead by then.

(Or living in Texas...:crazy:)

I think the reason you get so many postings about Texas is because it's the only other state to compare CA to. Both lie on a coast (yes the Gulf counts). Both are very large geographically. Both have large populations dominated by huge metropolitan regions. Both have very diverse populations/cultures. Both have diverse economies.

Texas is new growth. CA is older and established. Both are growing, both are growing differently.

Texas is what CA was years ago i think. Texas is attracting more people and businesses because its cheaper i think. Weather and geography sucks though. I support HSR from LA-SD because its a busy route.. but i think SF-LA makes much more sense. Yes its more expensive, but since SF being the financial and technology capitol here on the west coast and LA being the fashion capitol on the west coast and entertainment capitol of the world.. its better for them to collaborate and do business with each other.

I think ridership rail is higher between SD-LA because its not that far.. and ride doesn't take too long. But who wants to ride a 8-10 hour train ride from bay area to socal when its faster to fly? Yes it will still be faster flying than riding the HSR, but i think people will still pay to ride a bullet train from the Bay Area to SoCal taking 2-2 1/2 hours than having to go through the inconvenience of flying(security gates and all that).

Plus the train brings riders right in the heart of the city Transbay Terminal and Union Station.

Good news! East Village is likely getting a CityTarget in Makers Quarter! This brochure from Jones Lang LaSalle about Lucia nel Cielo mentions it.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3840/...83436049d6.jpg

If true, it looks like it would be built across from 15th & Island. A Target would certainly increase activity in that area, and would be a major amenity.

City Target
 

That's great! Definitely needed in the area.

"James Howard Kunstler and William Fulton, two of the world's top urban thinkers according to Planetizen.com, take a provocative look at the future of Buffalo and the NY region.

Kunstler is one of the most outspoken critics of suburban sprawl in books like "The Geography of Nowhere" and "The Long Emergency", and is a native New Yorker who lives in Saratoga Springs.

Fulton was born and raised in Auburn, but is now the Planning Director of the City of San Diego (the "City Makeover-in-Chief") and the former VP of Smart Growth America.

Join these two heavy hitters for a nuts-and-bolts look at how cities in New York can be successful and resilient in the coming decades.
Catherine Schweitzer, Executive Director of The Baird Foundation, will provide introduction and moderate."

[1:03:19]
http://youtu.be/yqNOLhCPDRM

A City Target would be a huge win for downtown -- I love the recently opened City in Seattle. This type of retail is one of the missing links downtown and would further solidify the downtown residential base.

I wonder if it would be a two-story, like the one at Mission Valley Center. On the other hand, that store was converted from a Montgomery Ward that originally opened back in 1961, so it may not be necessary to build it as a two-story.

Here are some examples of a City Target in Seattle that opened. My guess is that this will be 2 or 3 levels similar to the one in Mission Valley, but with a more compact footprint.

http://www.urbancondospaces.com/file...ity-target.jpg

Just emailed the people at MQ and they said Target is definitely looking but nothing is confirmed yet.
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5591/...d21ffd6c7a.jpg

Target
 

That's great news, hopefully the EV green will come around to replace Silo because Rad Lab/Quartyard seems to be perpetually stuck. It looks to be going on the silo block according to that picture. That has turned into a nice outdoor gathering spot.

Some uneventful news regarding the trolley extension into La Jolla/UTC

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/...-la-jolla-utc/

http://media.utsandiego.com/img/phot...8a41b9b1684c1a

Continued good news regarding Horton Plaza Park. http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2014/ju...ight-board-ok/

Would have been cool to watch the World Cup final there...oh well!

SANDAG posted some guidelines for station design for the new midcoast extension:

http://www.sandag.org/uploads/projec..._250_17901.pdf

The VA stop: http://www.sandag.org/uploads/projec..._250_17579.pdf

The UCSD stop: http://www.sandag.org/uploads/projec..._250_17578.pdf

Mayor Faulconer supports the current density limits in the OB Community Plan (bad).

My hope/assumption is that he is choosing his battles on pushing increased density in OB, given that:

1. OB has zero available land
2. The OB height limit is too low to make increased density worthwhile
3. OB is far from the Trolley lines
4. OB is part of Faulconer's former district

Anyone agree/disagree or have other thoughts?

I'm giving Faulconr a "pass" on this one in hopes that he is choosing his battles. I just hope this doesn't set a precedent.

Makes me wonder where the density will go...Mission Valley? San Ysidro? Kearny Mesa?

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/...coner-density/

I saw this and thought the same thing. OB is far from any mass transit option, either in existence or planned. I'm betting this is a strategic move, or at the very least an acceptance of reality. OB is in the coastal height limit zone, in Faulconers former district, and has been anti-development since community planning took off in the 60's/70's. It would be unrealistic to assume this community would be either able to handle or accept much more (although I would personally demand it to).

I hope this doesn't become a trend though. Golden Hill, South Park, Hillcrest, Mission Hills, Clairemont, College Area, Grantville, and other neighborhoods are already trying to lock out density increases. Meanwhile, Little Italy is being forced to by the FAA.

Leadership in this city is going to need to advocate for density increases somewhere, otherwise all of this talk about more housing is going to be just that.

Cross your fingers for Mission Valley, Kearny Mesa, San Ysidro, the southeastern and southern neighborhoods to make up for the selfishness of so many others.

Speaking of attempts to create more density:

http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/07/2...density-fight/

Your OB assessment sounds about right. Regarding the Grantville proposal I think this kind of thing is where a lot of growth is going to come from, removing old industrial uses left over from the 40's through 70's and revamping them to add housing.

--- I can think of far west Sorrento Valley (the Bowl just East down the escarpment from Torrey Pines and west of 805/5 merge), parts of La Mesa that are funky industrial, parts of Midway west of Pacific Highway, the 15/78 Interchange area in Escondido has a huge area of crappy old industrial, some segments of San Marcos have old low slung warehouse/distribution office parks.

Feel free to list others. Regarding South and South East SD, Chollas View has a lot of projects in the pipeline 47th and Market (within 1 -2 mile radius of intersection) has a lot of vacant land that is in the works to add dense housing.