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 Apr 17, 2014 6:47 PM

I like that North City project. I'm glad that they are finally starting to build some transit oriented developments around the sprinter which should increase ridership.

spoonman Apr 18, 2014 3:54 AM

Looks like the cross-border airport terminal is finally beginning construction. This was supposed to break ground in November or December, but has apparently been delayed.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/...?#article-copy

https://media.utsandiego.com/img/pho...2462d1b2132cb5

SDfan Apr 18, 2014 4:30 AM

That's good news. I hope it really grows into something useful for both sides.

nezbn22 Apr 18, 2014 3:36 PM

Because more development limitations is exactly what this city needs:

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/...e-italy-rules/

SDCAL Apr 18, 2014 5:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nezbn22 (Post 6545088)
Because more development limitations is exactly what this city needs:

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/...e-italy-rules/

I find this paragraph interesting (from the article):

'Based on guidelines issued by the state Department of Transportation, the authority adopted a land-use plan restricting the size of new buildings in a handful of San Diego communities so less people will be vulnerable to injury and death if planes crash.'

If I read this correctly they are saying the area is more prone to an aviation disaster so they want to restrict development so fewer people are there to be injured/killed?

This makes no sense. Either the airport is in a bad location and needs to be moved or it doesn't. If these places are so dangerous why do they want ANY people being vulnerable to injury??

Trying to clear areas in the middle of the city so "less people are vulnerable to injury" seems backwards and ignorant to me when the gorilla in the room is MOVING THE AIRPORT.

How many concessions is San Diego willing to make before they realize the airport must be relocated?

spoonman Apr 18, 2014 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 6545250)
I find this paragraph interesting (from the article):

'Based on guidelines issued by the state Department of Transportation, the authority adopted a land-use plan restricting the size of new buildings in a handful of San Diego communities so less people will be vulnerable to injury and death if planes crash.'

If I read this correctly they are saying the area is more prone to an aviation disaster so they want to restrict development so fewer people are there to be injured/killed?

This makes no sense. Either the airport is in a bad location and needs to be moved or it doesn't. If these places are so dangerous why do they want ANY people being vulnerable to injury??

Trying to clear areas in the middle of the city so "less people are vulnerable to injury" seems backwards and ignorant to me when the gorilla in the room is MOVING THE AIRPORT.

How many concessions is San Diego willing to make before they realize the airport must be relocated?

Good points. It would be nice if they would raise the height limit in the area deemed "safe". I understand that the FAA recommended max downtown is 700ft, as opposed to the self mandated limit of 500ft.

mello Apr 18, 2014 7:43 PM

This article about the State Dept of Transportation and how they are trying to dictate what can be built on specific blocks is appalling. How can Faulconer go along with this? I see lawsuits coming for sure, this is ludicrous and not based in any kind of common sense what so ever. As long as a project is obeying the height limits for a given area who cares what the density of the housing units is in said development??

What is the purpose of this?? I am so pissed off.... :hell: And Mission Hills, how is that neighborhood in the flight path at all? Not that any big projects would ever get built there anyway.


(State and Hawthorne btw isn't even that close to where the planes come directly over head so if they are trying to limit height in that block the area they are trying to impose these new limits on must be very big) I spoke with the writer for UT who wrote this and he said it is about height not density. So he said the 5 floor residential proposals will get knocked down to 3!!! We have to fight this!!!

nezbn22 Apr 18, 2014 8:06 PM

Yeah...I know the San Diego voters turned this down a number of years back, but I still don't see why everyone doesn't get behind converting Miramar into a larger, modern airport. If you look at a map, it looks like it'd be very easy to run the trolley out there, too.

As a military supporter and Top Gun fan, I'd be sad to see Miramar go. But it just seems like it makes too much sense. But I digress...

In other news, it looks like they put fresh sod down at the CAC Waterfront Park yesterday: http://www.countynewscenter.com/video?v=154015

SDfan Apr 18, 2014 11:16 PM

Little Italy is one of the few neighborhoods in this city actively trying to embrace more density and smart growth policies. This is extremely disappointing.

I need to move.

SDfan Apr 18, 2014 11:33 PM

From Uptown, to Golden Hill, to La Jolla and College Area, this city is doing everything possible to STOP new home construction and development. It's frustrating living in a community that thinks it's much smaller and inconsequential than it really is. Where do these people think their children are going to live? This is a community of stalwarts who call 3-story buildings "high-rises" and consider public transportation a poor mans trend. No wonder a majority of my millennial generation is leaving San Diego. My friends have gone to Texas (cheaper, less regulatory burden), San Francisco, Portland, or the East Coast (more expensive, but more opportunities and/or options). I understand. People moved here from the Midwest and found a paradise of orange groves. However, just as they moved here with the hope of opportunity there are others today -born here and otherwise- who are being denied that same opportunities because those old farts refuse to admit that their sleepy surfing village has become the 8th largest city in the United States.

This regulation wouldn't be so hard to swallow if their were other places in this city where this type of development could occur. But their really aren't many, and where they are allowed their are rigorous hurdles and hostile communities waiting to stop any progressive development plans, all because they were lucky enough to buy in when they had the chance and don't want to embrace the future.

Change is hard. And change in San Diego is harder. This is not a city for innovation. This is not a city for opportunity. This is a city for a privileged few who sit comfortably on their high chairs denying the growth and opportunity they themselves received decades ago. When this region becomes and overgrown Florida, an exaggerated Santa Barbara, for the old and wealthy only, no one should be surprised.

mello Apr 19, 2014 4:50 AM

^^ Great post SD Fan, you should right that as a letter to the UT and demand that Manchester and Lynch do all they can to fight this. Shouldn't the UT be super pro development? Why aren't they doing more to show the idiotic stance this city is taking on growth? Can you please outline the situations going on in La Jolla, Golden Hill, etc that you were referring to in your post, thanks :cheers:

Oh and where is Bill Fulton while all of this is going on? I thought he was a huge density advocate.

tyleraf Apr 19, 2014 6:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 6545269)
It would be nice if they would raise the height limit in the area deemed "safe". I understand that the FAA recommended max downtown is 700ft, as opposed to the self mandated limit of 500ft.

Unfortunately we have some misinformation about the height limit because it is the FAA. Here is a quote from this LA Times article from when OAP first opened http://articles.latimes.com/1991-10-..._america-plaza
Quote:

For the sake of pleasing proportions, it's too bad the Federal Aviation Administration turned down the developers' request to build to 600 feet. At 500 feet and 34 stories, the tower looks a mite squatty.
.

tyleraf Apr 19, 2014 6:57 AM

I totally agree with you SDfan I look forward to when the old farts who seem to have a DISPROPORTIONATELY loud voice in this city die off so we can actually build up more density. I feel bad for Little Italy. Finally one of our few urban communities coming together and the airport authority causes a disaster. Also, other than expanding the airport and such, what power do they have to make regulations? On a different note, I'm glad to see the CAC park start to wrap up. I'm glad that we finally are embracing one of the gems of our city rather than isolating it in between a sea of parking lots.

eburress Apr 19, 2014 4:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDfan (Post 6545590)
Little Italy is one of the few neighborhoods in this city actively trying to embrace more density and smart growth policies. This is extremely disappointing.

I need to move.

God, I know what you mean. This spot in the world, geographically speaking, is tough to beat, but this "city" blows.

eburress Apr 19, 2014 4:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyleraf (Post 6545901)
I totally agree with you SDfan I look forward to when the old farts who seem to have a DISPROPORTIONATELY loud voice in this city die off so we can actually build up more density. I feel bad for Little Italy. Finally one of our few urban communities coming together and the airport authority causes a disaster. Also, other than expanding the airport and such, what power do they have to make regulations? On a different note, I'm glad to see the CAC park start to wrap up. I'm glad that we finally are embracing one of the gems of our city rather than isolating it in between a sea of parking lots.

It's not just the old farts. My experience is that it's everybody property owner in this entire city. They care only about their property values and have zero regard for the needs of the region as a whole -- and nobody in the city government has the balls to stand up to these NIMBYs, so they run wild, stopping development at every turn. You can't hardly build anything anywhere. It's ridiculous.

tyleraf Apr 20, 2014 3:06 AM

Ok, I'll rephrase that the NIMBYS have way to much power. Unfortunately until progressive people outnumber the ones who don't want the status quo to change, we will never progress.

Erip Apr 21, 2014 10:30 PM

Trolley expansion and height limit
 
Yeesh:
http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/04/2...lley-tensions/

POPsee Apr 21, 2014 11:59 PM

What will happen to projects like the Fat City Lofts?

LosAngelesDreamin Apr 22, 2014 12:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDfan (Post 6545598)
From Uptown, to Golden Hill, to La Jolla and College Area, this city is doing everything possible to STOP new home construction and development. It's frustrating living in a community that thinks it's much smaller and inconsequential than it really is. Where do these people think their children are going to live? This is a community of stalwarts who call 3-story buildings "high-rises" and consider public transportation a poor mans trend. No wonder a majority of my millennial generation is leaving San Diego. My friends have gone to Texas (cheaper, less regulatory burden), San Francisco, Portland, or the East Coast (more expensive, but more opportunities and/or options). I understand. People moved here from the Midwest and found a paradise of orange groves. However, just as they moved here with the hope of opportunity there are others today -born here and otherwise- who are being denied that same opportunities because those old farts refuse to admit that their sleepy surfing village has become the 8th largest city in the United States.

This regulation wouldn't be so hard to swallow if their were other places in this city where this type of development could occur. But their really aren't many, and where they are allowed their are rigorous hurdles and hostile communities waiting to stop any progressive development plans, all because they were lucky enough to buy in when they had the chance and don't want to embrace the future.

Change is hard. And change in San Diego is harder. This is not a city for innovation. This is not a city for opportunity. This is a city for a privileged few who sit comfortably on their high chairs denying the growth and opportunity they themselves received decades ago. When this region becomes and overgrown Florida, an exaggerated Santa Barbara, for the old and wealthy only, no one should be surprised.


Agree... I'm moving to Los Angeles in June close to the Metro red line subway. LA is doing a good job embracing transit and density. I do love San Diego but its transit network sucks.. Yes LA's is still small as well... But growing at a fast pace... Only city building more than 3 rail lines at the same time right now.

spoonman Apr 22, 2014 2:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erip (Post 6548093)

Here is the contact info for the City Planning Department. I suggest everyone on this board write a few sentences and send it to all of these members.

I also suggest sending something strongly worded to the Clairemont Planning Board letting them know that they do not speak for all residents inside or outside of their area. This nonsense needs to stop. These people are ruining this city, and think that their house entitles them to view corridors for a lifetime at the expense of everyone else. If anyone is good with Twitter, please spread he word that these groups are basically anti-youth.


Mailing Addresses

City Planning Division
1222 First Avenue, MS 413
San Diego, CA 92101
planning@sandiego.gov

Management Team

Department Director
Bill Fulton, bfulton@sandiego.gov, (619)236-6057

Deputy Planning Director
Nancy Bragado, nsbragado@sandiego.gov, (619) 533-4549

Deputy Director, Environmental and Resource Analysis
Cathy Winterrowd, cwinterrowd@sandiego.gov, (619) 235-5217

Senior Traffic Engineer
Samir Hajjiri, shajjiri@sandiego.gov, (619) 533-6551

_____________

Clairemont Planning Group

jeffb@rbf.com

https://www.facebook.com/ClairemontPG

https://twitter.com/clairemontpg


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:24 PM.

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