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)

tyleraf Nov 14, 2014 9:00 PM

I'm glad to see UTC becoming more dense. Also, I'd love to see Faulconer become more aggressive with development. San Diego is one of the few major cities not going through a huge boom and that needs to change.

nezbn22 Nov 14, 2014 9:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 6807785)
So Ron Roberts just tweeted this, "Looking forward to talking urban cable car transit today with James Haughey's @SDSU Senior Design Class."
http://i.imgur.com/iLyK4GG.jpg

While fun to fantasize about, projects like the aerial cable cars and the bike/pedestrian tube under the Coronado Bridge are soooo far from anything close to real possibilities.

I like Ron Roberts, but this is the perfect example of a termed out politician taking one last hail mary swing for the fence. He got the Waterfront Park done after years of fighting, though, so he's allowed one last whopper in my book.

I'm pretty sure I saw this idea floated somewhere, but I'd love to see someone go after an elevated walkway around downtown (copying New York's new High Line). You could slap it right on top of the trolley line running east on C St. from One American Plaza to City College and then down Park Blvd to the library/Petco/transit center.

The only obstacle I see is the old County courthouse that spans C St. between Union and Front. But that's scheduled for demolition once the new courthouse is built. It would create a mostly uninterrupted pedestrian loop around downtown if you combine it with the waterfront.

That's my swing for the fences fantasy project... :notacrook:

spoonman Nov 14, 2014 9:28 PM

I would rather see Ron Roberts do something about the Chargers stadium than good around with a carnival ride for downtown. I think this is a fun idea, but there are more pressing matters. Also, this should not be called "transit".

staplesla Nov 14, 2014 9:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpexpress (Post 6807141)
were you at the DCPC meeting last night?

No my friend was, he's the one who shared the info with me.

SDfan Nov 15, 2014 4:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 6806988)
Can you go more in depth about what Garcetti is trying to do and why it isn't working? Like I said getting projects moving means jobs and more support for small business in the area which everyone seems to want to save.

First, his position:
http://www.latimes.com/business/real...029-story.html

Second, the reality he faces:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec...-plan-20131212

http://www.latimes.com/local/cityhal...821-story.html

http://www.latimes.com/local/cityhal...ry.html#page=1

Quote:

It's the latest of several setbacks for the city as it seeks to remake Hollywood with a series of big developments. Two months ago, a judge halted construction of a 74-foot-tall Target shopping center on Sunset Boulevard, saying the city had improperly allowed the project to exceed a 35-foot height limit.

Another judge forced the City Council to rescind a controversial 2012 plan allowing for taller buildings near transit stops in Hollywood, concluding the council had relied on out-of-date population data.

Community groups also are waging a legal fight that has slowed the planned Millennium project, a pair of 35- and 39-story skyscrapers. Opponents contend an earthquake fault runs beneath the site and construction is on hold until the case is resolved.

Attorney Robert P. Silverstein, who represented the activists in all four legal battles, said Hollywood's aging infrastructure cannot handle the "densification" Garcetti is planning. Neighborhood groups who are suing, he said, simply want the city to follow the law
:shrug:

There are more cases in LA like these, which makes me realize how lucky we are compared to places like Hollywood or Santa Monica.

SDfan Nov 15, 2014 4:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 6806966)
If it is 270 ft, it will be about 30% taller than Wells Fargo. I'm just not sure how a 16 story residential building is 270ft. Would be great though to have a new tallest. Hope the other 3 are taller also. Sucks these were almost 43, then 35 stories before being cut down by NIMBYs.

That height has to be wrong on the website, I'm sure it's below 200' by just looking at the rendering. I'm thinking the tallest structure will be 270' and they are mixing their height stats up with this rendering.

SDfan Nov 15, 2014 4:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 6806988)
Yeah how can a 16 floor tower be 270 feet? So there is no way to bring back the proposals of the 34 to 43 floor towers? Those are dead and never to be revived, I thought that battle was a few years ago maybe they can get around it now?

The original proposal is long dead (like 2008 dead). I actually believe the developer proposed the bigger (scarier) development as a ploy to force the University City Planning Group to settle for a "smaller" project that had been the developers original goal.

I say 40 stories, you say 20 stories, I "concede" and we agree for 25 instead. Oh well! Looks like you all got me... (*runs to the bank*) :rolleyes:

Not to say I don't like it when developers have to pull this tactic, but it sucks they have to maneuver in these ways to get things done.

SDfan Nov 15, 2014 5:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 6807785)
So Ron Roberts just tweeted this, "Looking forward to talking urban cable car transit today with James Haughey's @SDSU Senior Design Class."
http://i.imgur.com/iLyK4GG.jpg

I'm laughing if Ron Roberts thinks this is going to not only be built, but built quickly. It took them how many decades to build those parks at the admin building?

Lolololololololz. 2050, at the earliest!

SDCAL Nov 15, 2014 8:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 6808054)
I would rather see Ron Roberts do something about the Chargers stadium than good around with a carnival ride for downtown. I think this is a fun idea, but there are more pressing matters. Also, this should not be called "transit".

I agree with you, minus the part about the Charger's stadium. Even IF this was something that could realistically be built, I don't think it should be. It's stupid. We are a city in desperate need of better reliable mass transit, and our public officials are floating around, as you aptly call it, "a carniaval ride".

SD does need local officials to think big, but the big thinking needs to be more along the lines of underground transit and putting light rail up Park Blvd to finally connect downtown to balboa park to mid-city with rail.

The last thing we need is a glorified ski-lift swirling around downtown. Even those renderings look comical. I don't mean to sound so negative, because Roberts is at least "thinking big" which I agree we need more politicians to do, but this idea just seems like the last thing we should be pushing for. There are so many other big things we need.

rocksteady Nov 16, 2014 3:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nezbn22 (Post 6808034)
While fun to fantasize about, projects like the aerial cable cars and the bike/pedestrian tube under the Coronado Bridge are soooo far from anything close to real possibilities.

I like Ron Roberts, but this is the perfect example of a termed out politician taking one last hail mary swing for the fence. He got the Waterfront Park done after years of fighting, though, so he's allowed one last whopper in my book.

I'm pretty sure I saw this idea floated somewhere, but I'd love to see someone go after an elevated walkway around downtown (copying New York's new High Line). You could slap it right on top of the trolley line running east on C St. from One American Plaza to City College and then down Park Blvd to the library/Petco/transit center.

The only obstacle I see is the old County courthouse that spans C St. between Union and Front. But that's scheduled for demolition once the new courthouse is built. It would create a mostly uninterrupted pedestrian loop around downtown if you combine it with the waterfront.

That's my swing for the fences fantasy project... :notacrook:

I'd be for this if it were a privately funded venture and viewed as a project intended for tourism rather than looked at as an alternative mode of transportation that the city wastes its own time and money on. lol And if they wanted this to look like a cool, modern way of getting around town they could have at least used pods that don't look like leftovers from the People Mover at Disneyland.

nezbn22 Nov 17, 2014 4:52 PM

On Saturday, I walked over to the grand opening of Phase I of the North Embarcadero Visionary Plan. It was a fun little event, but nothing to write home about. They aren't even really finished with it. They still need to knock down the dingy Bayside Cafe and install Carnitas Snack Shack. It's a very clear upgrade over what it replaced, but I thought the celebratory "completion" was a bit premature.

Also of note - I noticed a semi-permanent fence erected on the east side of Bosa's Pacific and Broadway lot. By "semi-permanent", I mean the poles are cemented into the ground, but it's still a chain-link fence with a covering over it (like something that would surround a construction site). Maybe they're getting ready to build?????

bushman61988 Nov 17, 2014 6:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 6807693)
I could only make it through about 6 comments. These people basically said: I got mine, fuck anyone else. I don't think they have any clue why housing is so expensive in SD.

This is almost verbatim what Environmental Attorney Marco Gonzalez said at the SD Housing Federation Conference last month: http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/10/2...1076:228962372

aerogt3 Nov 18, 2014 9:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtell04 (Post 6807693)
I could only make it through about 6 comments. These people basically said: I got mine, fuck anyone else. I don't think they have any clue why housing is so expensive in CALIFORNIA.

FTFY. And by the way, these people exist everywhere. The difference is that in California they have loads of state environmental laws to hide behind and the coastal commission to help them block projects.

travis bickle Nov 19, 2014 1:16 AM

Not a skyscraper story, but development related. I've seen some posts regarding the bureaucracy and how it makes building housing more difficult.

Here's a story that may interest some of you.

We just canceled a purchase on a project in Imperial Beach on SR-75.

Beautiful mixed-use by one of San Diego's leading architectural firms. 49 for sale units - 5600sf retail. Mix of 2/2.5 - 1/1.5 and lofts. Large units; very affordably priced with the 2bd units pro forma'd at $450k.

Project meets all local zoning regulations and in fact, the city loves it and had suggested a quick approval process of about 4 months remaining to permits (architects have been working with City over a year on this).

At present, site is vacant having been demo'ed in 2010 by owner. Here's where it gets interesting...

Site for 30 years was a flop-house motel that charged by the hour. Owner let it fall into disrepair and closed it in 2006 (last TOT records we could find). After it was closed, it became a haven for the homeless who moved in en masse. They absolutely trashed the place, eventually even using the inoperable toilets as fire places and stoves.

It was an absolute disaster for nearly four years. The city was constantly citing the owner and the Sherriff's Department was out there daily, often many times a day as the site deteriorated and became a magnet for everything ill associated with urban blight.

In response, owner bulldozed it in 2010, graded the land and the site has been empty since.

This project was everything the town wanted and needed.

Then the Coastal Commission became involved... Mind you, we had of course kept the CC informed of our plans the entire time. Staff had mentioned that there was a minor issue with the previous use, but that it shouldn't be critical and certainly not lethal. While the site is just outside of the Coastal Zone and the Commission has no legal jurisdiction, what is DOES have is the power to appeal the city's approval.

In our last meeting with the City, staff informed us that the Coastal Commission was no longer being so agreeable. Apparently, because the site used to be a motel, it had fulfilled one of the Commission's high priorities, that being low cost beach access. Never mind that the site is not on nor near any beach. It is on the inland side on SR-75, near a donut shop.

Remember, this was the proverbial flea-bag, Crack Ho Inn, but because housing near the coast is not a Commission priority, and "low-cost access" is, they found that by developing this badly needed housing in Imperial Beach, we were actually damaging the ability for low-income people to enjoy the coast.

Sooooo... if we wanted to proceed with their blessing, we were going to have to convert 24 of the for-sale units (same as number of rooms in old motel) into a low-cost hotel. They wouldn't even be satisfied with paying the in-lieu fee of about $30k/unit since most developers had chosen that route for other sites before and because of the restrictions on use if you tap that funding source (like any agreement is for... PERPETUITY), they had plenty of "in-lieu" money in the bank and didn't want to add anymore. Didn't matter really as that kind of hit killed the deal anyway, but it wasn't even an option.

This last-minute demand killed the deal. Absolutely.

Remember, the Coastal Commission didn't actually have any jurisdiction over the site. The city had the final say and very much wanted the project to move forward. But the Commission can appeal. And they told us, discretely, that after their review during the City's comment period, they most certainly WOULD appeal and that they would drag out the process for at least two more years.

Money can't wait two additional years...

So we canceled our PSA and the project is officially dead.

Your tax dollars at work! :)

Derek Nov 19, 2014 3:06 AM

Why can't anybody tell the Coastal Commission to just shut the f*** up? Why do people feel obligated to appeal to them, despite the fact that they had no jurisdiction? What's in it for the City of Imperial Beach to cave in to such ludicrous demands?

aerogt3 Nov 19, 2014 4:25 PM

What a load of complete madness. Have you guys gone to any news outlets with this? And Derek, it sounds like Imperial Beach caving in wasn't the issue, but rather the coastal commission being able to delay things by 2 years.

spoonman Nov 19, 2014 5:14 PM

Manchester would have a field day with this...unless he is intimidated also.

mello Nov 19, 2014 6:13 PM

Travis your story infuriates me :hell: Have you guys considered going to the media with this story? It sounds like the premise of "low cost coastal access" is similar to what is delaying Sunroad from moving forward with its huge hotel project on Harbor Island.

Faulconer and Jerry Brown talk about jobs, well how many jobs have the Coastal Commission held up with instances similar to what Travis just laid out? I'm sure the mayor of Imperial Beach has lambasted the CC and tried to get in touch with Jerry Browns office.

I spent a decent amount of time in IB this year and it was growing on me and I could see the potential. Projects of this nature is exactly what that city needs to start to bring in more professional mid income people. There is almost nothing modern with quality architecture in IB and this sounded so awesome. When people in a community see solid structures being built in their area it gives them a sense of self worth and they think "Ok someone cares about IB and is willing to invest here". Something must be done about this.

ElDuderino Nov 20, 2014 12:07 AM

My pictures 11/19

Pendry Hotel

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i1...ps6d697aa2.jpg

Courtyard Marriott

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i1...psc760646f.jpg

Courtyard Marriott with Sempra Energy tower

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i1...ps6bc6d9fb.jpg

Sempra Energy tower. Cladding looks nice in person

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i1...ps59c78dab.jpg

HurricaneHugo Nov 20, 2014 6:06 AM

I'm assuming it's topped out :(


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.