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)

bmfarley Nov 22, 2009 6:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpexpress (Post 4568450)
http://www.sdcitybeat.com/cms/story/..._village/8693/

A football stadium in East Village? Architect/developer Graham Downes calls it “an idiotic idea.”

“It will be the death of the area,” he said. “You have this behemoth structure that’s very vertical just sitting there in the middle of town, just sapping all the energy out of the place.”

Downes, a vanguard in East Village’s redevelopment, has long been interested in the area’s industrial past and the potential re-use of its warehouses. He heads Blokhaus, a development company that, among other projects, overhauled the Wonder Bread Factory, the historic building on 14th Street, between Imperial Avenue and K Street, that’s become the reference point for a stadium site but was once part of Downes’ vision for East Village: a hip-yet-gritty live/work area—akin to Vancouver’s Yaletown—that connects seamlessly to Downtown and Barrio Logan, each neighborhood flowing into the next without losing its individual character.

“Somebody should do some visuals so they can see the impact of these two huge stadiums next to each other,” he said. “You can’t walk around them, you can’t walk through them. It’s like a walled city, like you plunked a castle in the middle. It’s somebody’s monument.”

An East Village stadium is far from a done deal, but discussions about its feasibility are moving forward faster than any other proposal put forward in the seven years since the Chargers first expressed interest in moving, arguing in 2002 that continued use of Qualcomm Stadium compromised the team’s “economic viability.”

On Oct. 30, online news site voiceofsandiego.org reported that Mayor Jerry Sanders had met with Chargers President Dean Spanos; Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani confirmed for a voice reporter that East Village was discussed. And, on Wednesday, Nov. 18, the board of directors for the Centre City Development Corp., the agency that oversees Downtown redevelopment, will vote on spending $160,000 on a consultant to study the stadium’s feasibility.

Darren Pudgil, Sanders’ spokesperson, told voice that the mayor’s preference was for the Chargers to stay in Mission Valley. It’s Downes’ preference, too.

“We need urban development Downtown,” he said. “A ballpark is not an urban development; it’s suburban development. It needs to be out in the sticks where there’s lots of parking, where cars can queue in line for ages without impacting the area.”

So far, only about 10 acres of land in East Village has been identified for a stadium—miniscule compared to the 592 square acres the City of Industry is making available for its proposed stadium. Last month, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation exempting the L.A. area stadium from environmental review, further putting the pressure on San Diego County to site a new stadium or risk losing the Chargers to L.A.

On Monday, Downes dissolved his interest in the Wonder Bread building—he had been the controlling leaseholder. He did it for multiple reasons, he said, not just the stadium. But, he added, “lots of people have land in that area who are trying to make things happen. No one’s going to come down [to East Village] because they’re going to say, ‘Well, if I set up there, print up business cards and start to get cozy and the Chargers come in, I’m toast.’”

That's pretty much what I said a few days ago... I would like to see examples of a downtown football stadium and impacts around them. Pictures please. Otherwise, I have an overwhleming sense of feeling that a stadium will do the same... kill the energy around it.

bmfarley Nov 22, 2009 6:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staplesla (Post 4568487)
Really? Is he suggesting that Petco is taller than the other high-rises in the area? And that the footprint takes up more space than other downtown developments? - Horton Plaza, Convention Center, Civic Center, etc. And Petco sapped all the energy out of the area? The Petco area is stronger now than it has been in decades. And once the economy comes back the empty stores will fill in.

This guy's an idiot.

Baseball does not equal football

bmfarley Nov 22, 2009 6:27 PM

And, hypothetically, where would the bus yard relocate too... and at who's expense?

I tell you... the expense would be on the backs of the public... specifically CCDC and pro-stadium financiers. And, selecting a new site is a dilemma.... because near downtown is an ideal location b/c it is near teh beginning/end of many bus routes.

By the way, that yard is owned by MTS..., not a city/county department.

Fusey Nov 22, 2009 7:18 PM

Someone already brought up Qwest Field in Seattle. It's probably the most relevant comparison with an adjacent baseball stadium. I'm not familiar enough with Seattle to know the impact Qwest Field has had on nearby businesses, but from the looks of it from Google Maps/Street View, the stadium doesn't exactly look like it fits well in the area.

There's also Heinz Field in Pittsburgh, but that is surrounded by parking lots; I don't think you could really use Ford Field in Detroit as example due to the dire economy in that city; the Metrodome in Minneapolis has been open for decades and is still surrounded by parking lots.

Unfortunately Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis is so new it's hard judge the impact that that stadium has had on the surrounding area. It will host the Super Bowl in 2012, though. If any major developments are being planned the city, obviously, would be want them completed before then.

I say we check out the Indy threads, talk to Seattle forumers, and get their opinions. There's also the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis, but like Seattle I'm not familiar enough with that city to know its impact.

IconRPCV Nov 22, 2009 7:56 PM

I think the best comparison would be Baltimore, they have their two stadiums downtown in the inner harbor area.

tdavis Nov 22, 2009 8:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 4572362)
And, hypothetically, where would the bus yard relocate too... and at who's expense?

I tell you... the expense would be on the backs of the public... specifically CCDC and pro-stadium financiers.

You don't know that? Why don't you wait for the details before making statements that may be false.

IconRPCV Nov 22, 2009 8:45 PM

Lets build things. Lets build the stadium, and the library, and an extensive mass-transit system, and a new airport, a new city hall, the convention center expansion, and more parks. What would San Diego be without Balboa Park, or Mission Bay, or Jack Murphy Stadium, thank goodness that someone once had the foresight to BUILD something to make this place better.

During the great depression we built our way out of it, why not build our way out of the great recession.

Fusey Nov 22, 2009 9:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IconRPCV (Post 4572493)
I think the best comparison would be Baltimore, they have their two stadiums downtown in the inner harbor area.

I don't think Baltimore works. The football stadium there is cut off from the rest of downtown and is practically surrounded by freeways.

eburress Nov 23, 2009 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IconRPCV (Post 4572558)
Lets build things. Lets build the stadium, and the library, and an extensive mass-transit system, and a new airport, a new city hall, the convention center expansion, and more parks. What would San Diego be without Balboa Park, or Mission Bay, or Jack Murphy Stadium, thank goodness that someone once had the foresight to BUILD something to make this place better.

During the great depression we built our way out of it, why not build our way out of the great recession.

hahaha - I think you're onto something.

eburress Nov 23, 2009 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PadreHomer (Post 4572292)
Well maybe if they leave here and go to texas we can pick up the pieces and fix their mess.

So, a bunch of Texans came to California and are currently here messing things up? And for that matter, who is in Texas right now making things work...Californians?

eburress Nov 23, 2009 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fusey (Post 4572443)
Someone already brought up Qwest Field in Seattle. It's probably the most relevant comparison with an adjacent baseball stadium. I'm not familiar enough with Seattle to know the impact Qwest Field has had on nearby businesses, but from the looks of it from Google Maps/Street View, the stadium doesn't exactly look like it fits well in the area.

There's also Heinz Field in Pittsburgh, but that is surrounded by parking lots; I don't think you could really use Ford Field in Detroit as example due to the dire economy in that city; the Metrodome in Minneapolis has been open for decades and is still surrounded by parking lots.

Unfortunately Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis is so new it's hard judge the impact that that stadium has had on the surrounding area. It will host the Super Bowl in 2012, though. If any major developments are being planned the city, obviously, would be want them completed before then.

I say we check out the Indy threads, talk to Seattle forumers, and get their opinions. There's also the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis, but like Seattle I'm not familiar enough with that city to know its impact.

I am somewhat familiar with Seattle prior to the stadium being built, and it was pretty inhospitable to begin with. I can't imagine the stadium hurting the situation.

bmfarley Nov 23, 2009 6:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdavis (Post 4572513)
You don't know that? Why don't you wait for the details before making statements that may be false.

You're right. The transit system will probably rollover and just give the property away! They don't need a maintenace and storage facility.... they could roll up their buses at night and park them around your apartment building. That might as welll be a good place to change the oil and fluids too.

dl3000 Nov 23, 2009 6:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IconRPCV (Post 4572558)
Lets build things. Lets build the stadium, and the library, and an extensive mass-transit system, and a new airport, a new city hall, the convention center expansion, and more parks. What would San Diego be without Balboa Park, or Mission Bay, or Jack Murphy Stadium, thank goodness that someone once had the foresight to BUILD something to make this place better.

During the great depression we built our way out of it, why not build our way out of the great recession.

Hell yeah! Thats what I'm all about. PS, World War II ended the great depression, had to crank out that military industrial complex, the new deal and other public works only started it but they didn't finish the job.


And on this Texas thing, sure low taxes and regulation for business is the way to go. I typically am for government regulation (you can say im a "big government liberal" if you want to) but there is a line and California has crossed it. All these contradicting propositions and stuff that each has its own budget and if it gets passed its law may have worked when the state was smaller, but it is ridiculously inefficient. I think the state government needs to be reconstructed from the ground up. And I dont care how nice the amenities in Texas are, money doesn't buy you beaches and dry summers and mild winters.

eburress Nov 23, 2009 3:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl3000 (Post 4573408)
Hell yeah! Thats what I'm all about. PS, World War II ended the great depression, had to crank out that military industrial complex, the new deal and other public works only started it but they didn't finish the job.


And on this Texas thing, sure low taxes and regulation for business is the way to go. I typically am for government regulation (you can say im a "big government liberal" if you want to) but there is a line and California has crossed it. All these contradicting propositions and stuff that each has its own budget and if it gets passed its law may have worked when the state was smaller, but it is ridiculously inefficient. I think the state government needs to be reconstructed from the ground up. And I dont care how nice the amenities in Texas are, money doesn't buy you beaches and dry summers and mild winters.

For sure! hahaha (though if the Chargers leave, I don't care how great the weather and beaches are - I'm still outta here! :) )

Crackertastik Nov 23, 2009 7:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl3000 (Post 4573408)
Hell yeah! Thats what I'm all about. PS, World War II ended the great depression, had to crank out that military industrial complex, the new deal and other public works only started it but they didn't finish the job.


And on this Texas thing, sure low taxes and regulation for business is the way to go. I typically am for government regulation (you can say im a "big government liberal" if you want to) but there is a line and California has crossed it. All these contradicting propositions and stuff that each has its own budget and if it gets passed its law may have worked when the state was smaller, but it is ridiculously inefficient. I think the state government needs to be reconstructed from the ground up. And I dont care how nice the amenities in Texas are, money doesn't buy you beaches and dry summers and mild winters.


Another less talked about Problem with California...Proposition 13 which limits property taxes. Since 78, just try to imagine how much property values have increased, and then imagine how stagnant property tax increases have been. It makes the taxes due on properties disproportionate to their value. That is a SHIT ton of money the state is losing out on.

This state should be much more business friendly, lower corporate taxes, and counter that by having regulations restricting a free for all. And then, the state should get compensation for its land value back to proper proportionality.

PadreHomer Nov 24, 2009 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 4572898)
So, a bunch of Texans came to California and are currently here messing things up? And for that matter, who is in Texas right now making things work...Californians?

no

Dale Nov 24, 2009 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl3000 (Post 4573408)
Hell yeah! Thats what I'm all about. PS, World War II ended the great depression, had to crank out that military industrial complex, the new deal and other public works only started it but they didn't finish the job.


And on this Texas thing, sure low taxes and regulation for business is the way to go. I typically am for government regulation (you can say im a "big government liberal" if you want to) but there is a line and California has crossed it. All these contradicting propositions and stuff that each has its own budget and if it gets passed its law may have worked when the state was smaller, but it is ridiculously inefficient. I think the state government needs to be reconstructed from the ground up. And I dont care how nice the amenities in Texas are, money doesn't buy you beaches and dry summers and mild winters.

Yeah, but does it buy you money ? The money part is the one thing that keeps me from living in SD.

kpexpress Nov 25, 2009 10:48 AM

I am in no way proposing this or am saying that I would be in favor of such a proposal, but I thought I would pose the question. This is of course in regards to the downtown Chargers football stadium.

If the Chargers, some how, acquire a huge portion of land, lets say from the 5 to Park Blvd, and between Imperial and K Street. And there they developed a world class multi-sport (but football focused) olympic grade sports venue with a mixed use urban village to tie it into the grid......

Do you think that if the above was actually pulled off would the Barrio feel LESS or MORE disconnected from Downtown?

I think that if that was done it would create a huge physical CORNER in downtown and virtually boundary off any connection neighborhood, but then I was thinking and asked myself the question, "How connected is the Barrio to Downtown?" "Would they even care?" "Would downtown notice a difference?"

The two neighborhoods and even more southern areas of the city are directly connected by the Trolley and all seem to enjoy and quaint local vibe with local economies and walkable neighorhoods not so much dependent on a direct (pedestrian, or vehicular) access to downtown.

Your thoughts...... KP

dl3000 Nov 25, 2009 10:27 PM

My thoughts align more with your second opinion. I never though the Barrio to be well linked anyway, especially with the rail yards and the 5 freeway, Coronado bridge, shipyards etc. That part of DT was never "vibrant" or "diverse" but rather just industrial. Though I say that sports venue idea would effectively wall off downtown, which may not be so good for anyone.

SDfan Nov 26, 2009 3:56 AM

I can see the people in Barrio Logan being concerned about noise, density and potential redevelopment in their neighborhood...mainly because they have voiced these concerns to the city before. The SD Reader had an excellent cover story on the Barrio a few months ago. I think a sports complex would be a positive for the area (dead sports complex or dead industrial area?). An urban village would be nice, but if bay access is bad enough by fifth, what about around tenth where you have an industrial marine terminal? Not very appealing to see or live by. I just wonder what the port and its workers in the area are going to say. They protested Ballpark Village fearing it would eventually push them into the bay. I can see them protesting any residential/commercial/hotel developments that may spring up around them.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:06 AM.

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