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)

eburress Jun 28, 2007 5:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandiegodweller (Post 2922497)
"People from Arizona" pay less than $350,00 average for their new homes in the Phoenix area. I doubt that they are buying second homes in downtown San Diego for $400,00 to $500,000 for "weekend getaways".

That's definitely what wealthy people in Dallas are doing - buying summer/winter homes in San Diego. It seems like almost everyone I knew in Dallas owned a second home here - usually in La Jolla or Del Mar though.

dl3000 Jun 28, 2007 6:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandiegodweller (Post 2922497)
"People from Arizona" pay less than $350,00 average for their new homes in the Phoenix area. I doubt that they are buying second homes in downtown San Diego for $400,00 to $500,000 for "weekend getaways".

The glut of condos in downtown is a direct result of the homebuilders reacting to false demand fueled by speculation due to cheap money.

The publically traded homebuilders have written off $3.3 billion in bad land transactions over the past year.

The replacement costs to build a new highrise should be about $600 per sq. ft. so that should limit the prices for resales on the downside and curb future supply until the current projects are absorbed.

I don't know about you but the idea to me doesn't sound crazy. It actually seems quite practical for people to spend weekends here and work far inland.

sandiegodweller Jun 28, 2007 4:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl3000 (Post 2922893)
I don't know about you but the idea to me doesn't sound crazy. It actually seems quite practical for people to spend weekends here and work far inland.


Really?

mello Jun 28, 2007 10:37 PM

This is the problem in San Diego
 
Roadwarrior quote: Now, we have the affordability problem here in the bay area as well, but I think the demand for these types of units up here will continue to be strong, due to the large number of high paying jobs (high tech, consulting, I-banking, venture capital, etc), in addition to the traditional high paying professional positions (doctor, lawyer, business owner) and the old money.


This is exactly what the San Diego metro area needs to get all of these condo projects filled. People would love to live downtown, but there are simply not enough jobs here that pay six figures and up like in the Bay Area. Most people here have salaries in the 30 to 60k range and that is not near enough to afford mortgages in these downtown buildings.

So will these good jobs ever come to SD??? What do you think SanDiegoDweller? So I guess the demand is here but those who have the demand don't have the money.... lol :(

eburress Jun 29, 2007 1:27 AM

^^ The first step is to build a new airport. Corporate expansion will follow, bringing those good jobs along with it.

Derek Jun 29, 2007 4:04 AM

^I agree. A new airport would be the gateway to San Diego's future.

roadwarrior Jun 29, 2007 4:49 AM

I don't know if I agree about an airport solving ALL of SD's problems. Prior to living in SF, I lived in SD and then in Phoenix. Phoenix has a top rate airport (although you can argue that terminal 2 needs to be replaced). Sure, it possibly is spurring growth, but I don't think that the airport there is turning PHX into a "world-class" city. Like SD, few major corporations are HQ'd there and most jobs are service based.

I personally think SD has the right plan with biotech, in terms of spinning it off UCSD. They just need to expand this into more sectors, which pay more than research science.

eburress Jun 29, 2007 5:07 AM

Airports are generally high on the lists of companies looking to relocate. SD has some other things working against it, but unlike real estate costs, the airport could be fixable.

bmfarley Jun 29, 2007 6:19 AM

The biggest thing on the horizon that could positively affect San Diego, including downtown, would be if the proposed high speed rail project is constructed. This project would bring around 13 million people to/from San Diego each year. That's pretty respectable when compared to Lindbergh's approximate 20 million annual figure.

By the way, that figure comes from the California High Speed rail Authority's ridership projections done by their consultatn, Cambridge Systematics. their report details 367,000 daily trips between San Diego and Los Angeles... or approximately 134 million a year. I came up with 13 million for SD by dividing by 10.... the number of stations I am assuming that there'd be between LA and SD. So, SD could have many more. Afterall, how many will get on/off at Escondido, UTC, Riverside and Murrieta????

eburress Jun 29, 2007 10:38 PM

^^ That doesn't really help most business travelers.

sandiegodweller Jun 30, 2007 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 2924180)
Roadwarrior quote: Now, we have the affordability problem here in the bay area as well, but I think the demand for these types of units up here will continue to be strong, due to the large number of high paying jobs (high tech, consulting, I-banking, venture capital, etc), in addition to the traditional high paying professional positions (doctor, lawyer, business owner) and the old money.


This is exactly what the San Diego metro area needs to get all of these condo projects filled. People would love to live downtown, but there are simply not enough jobs here that pay six figures and up like in the Bay Area. Most people here have salaries in the 30 to 60k range and that is not near enough to afford mortgages in these downtown buildings.

So will these good jobs ever come to SD??? What do you think SanDiegoDweller? So I guess the demand is here but those who have the demand don't have the money.... lol :(

See Road Warrior's comments in Post 1723. I think they sum it up.

bmfarley Jun 30, 2007 6:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 2926395)
^^ That doesn't really help most business travelers.

Most?

How do you know? Where are business travellers coming from? Or to?

If business travelers are coming from LA, or the Valley, or SF or Sac... the train will be just as competitive. More so with some than others....

Also, while on a train a traveller will have much more ability to communicate with the outside world. Cell phones, laptops, etc... each are useable on a train. Can't say that about that while being on a plane.

Either way, I am not saying Lindbergh should not be relocated elsewhere. My point I will hit upon time and time again is that high speed rail will reduce the demands on it and will make it more useable and useful longer. No, HSR is not a solution to Lindberg woes for not being able to get bigger planes in/out and having direct flights to distant locations.

eburress Jun 30, 2007 7:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2927053)
Most?

How do you know? Where are business travellers coming from? Or to?

Yes, most.

I know that because I can count the places where the rail lines will go and the places the rail lines won't go. The former is WAY smaller than the latter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2927053)
If business travelers are coming from LA, or the Valley, or SF or Sac... the train will be just as competitive. More so with some than others....

Unfortunately for SD, business happens in other places as well. Frankly, it's already pretty easy to reach LA, SF, and the Valley, so HSR really isn't addressing ANY of SD's airport issues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2927053)
Also, while on a train a traveller will have much more ability to communicate with the outside world. Cell phones, laptops, etc... each are useable on a train. Can't say that about that while being on a plane.

Either way, I am not saying Lindbergh should not be relocated elsewhere. My point I will hit upon time and time again is that high speed rail will reduce the demands on it and will make it more useable and useful longer. No, HSR is not a solution to Lindberg woes for not being able to get bigger planes in/out and having direct flights to distant locations.

Reducing the demands on Lindburgh isn't the point and it isn't the same thing as having a major international airport that is going to attract the kind of corporate expansion that SD needs.

keg92101 Jun 30, 2007 7:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2927053)
Most?

How do you know? Where are business travellers coming from? Or to?

If business travelers are coming from LA, or the Valley, or SF or Sac... the train will be just as competitive. More so with some than others....

Also, while on a train a traveller will have much more ability to communicate with the outside world. Cell phones, laptops, etc... each are useable on a train. Can't say that about that while being on a plane.

Either way, I am not saying Lindbergh should not be relocated elsewhere. My point I will hit upon time and time again is that high speed rail will reduce the demands on it and will make it more useable and useful longer. No, HSR is not a solution to Lindberg woes for not being able to get bigger planes in/out and having direct flights to distant locations.


What will HSR really do? I mean Really? If you look at any other vibrant metro area in the united states, better yet, the world, they have great metropolitan transportation (not regional), both convenient and affordable. A means of transporting workers, to jobs in an effortless way. More than any other town, DC comes to mind. By far and away, the best public rail I've ever been on, from an asthetic and functional viewpoint.

Why can't San Diego move rail through the older urban areas, similar to DC? It will centralize growth, move jobs closer together, and cut down on conjestion. I hate to be a downer, but, really, when I can fly to SF for $140, Round Trip, why would I want to take a train there, when it will take 2x as long for at least the same price...even if it is HSR.

Believe me, Modern Day subways are a much better investment than HSR. All you have to do is visit Washington DC for an example

spoonman Jun 30, 2007 7:53 AM

I always thought University Avenue is especially ripe for a new rail line along with some other arterials.

Why on earth aren't there any rail lines that serve the beach areas of PB, MB, OB, Airport area before connecting to the dt transit hub. That would be a heavily traveled route by both residents as well as visitors.

eburress Jun 30, 2007 8:10 AM

Agreed - HSR may sound sexy, but what's it really going to do for SD/CA?

HurricaneHugo Jun 30, 2007 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonman (Post 2927137)
Why on earth aren't there any rail lines that serve the beach areas of PB, MB, OB, Airport area before connecting to the dt transit hub. That would be a heavily traveled route by both residents as well as visitors.

yeah its pathetic how visitors have to take an old bus to the beach

bmfarley Jun 30, 2007 5:21 PM

^^^ Well, I agree about local bus vs light-rail. LRT would be much faster to get around San Diego than being on a bus. Further, I am sure many many more people would choose to ride the Trolley if it were provided rather than a bus because... just because it is a train.

I would. In fact, I do. My 1st year here I took the trolley to and from work... a 20-25 minute direct route. I moved and now have bus as an option... another 20-25 minute ride directly to work. So what do I do even though my travel time is about the same? I drive instead. Honestly, I only take the bus into work maybe 1/week! The problems with buses is that they run on-time less often. They are not terrible... it's just that they are slightly less reliable than trains. And, there's less room and you're squished closer to other riders. And to be honest... some of those riders are not very nice to be around and the bus seems to attract slightly more than the Trolley. However, all-in-all... by and large the majority of riders are just like you and me.

As for train access to the beaches and University Avenue.... I agree. If the money were in place to construct it those would probably be successful train lines. especially along University (or El Cajon).


But about high speed rail.... the intent or design of the system is to provide a statewide option for getting to distant locations and compete with longer trips made by other modes. Although is can be used for commute trips, depending on station locations, HSR is designed for other purposes than localized trips. High Speed Rail is most competitive with trips in the 300 mile range. The main touted benefit is travel time. Compared to air travel, when one accounts for the need to get into an airport, be there 60 minutes before the flight, the flight, and getting out of the destination airport.... HSR will get you to your destination faster or at about the same time. The longer the distance the less competitive HSR becomes.

SD to San Francisco is probably outside of the envelope for HSR being more competitive than air travel with respect to travel time. As an example... Just Thursday night I flew from SD to San Jose on American... a similar trip as to SF. Anyway, I left for the airport at 6:55pm to get dropped off at 7:10pm-ish. My flight was at 8:10. Boarding began about 7:30 and the plane left on time. I got to San Jose and was walking out the terminal at slightly after 9:30pm... in what turned out to be an approximate 2:35 total travel time.

If on High Speed Rail the trip would take 3:27 to 3:40 according to the table below depending on the different alignments being discussed up in the Bay Area. This is about a 1hr difference.... so HSR IS less competitive for this trip when considering travel time. Although imo... there is a lot of opportunity to straighten out the alighnment to reduce this time. If travellers factor in other things... like the hassle of airports or the ability to use electronic devices, or the consistency of flights to leave on time... well, HSR could indeed be the first choice for many travellers, including business travellers.

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...tamontTime.jpg

HSR also envisions the future. Take into consideration that the state is growing at a rate of 400,000 to 600,000 people every year. The states population is currenlty around 37 million. In 25 years or so... it'll be around 50 million. Those are projections not done by me... but demograpghers overseeing official projections. Now consider the transportation infrastructure needed to accomodate those numbers... and numbers beyond! The state simply does not have the financial resources or physical space to accomodate the increasing demands on our airports and highways.

Airports across the state, not just in San Diego, are landlocked with few opportunities to expand. Major highways... are choked at thousands of places across the state and cannot be expanded due to neighboring homes or other physical constraints. Resolving those constraints will come at twice the price than HSR... $40 billion for HSR while improvements to others are estimated at $80 billion! There is also fewer environmental impacts with electrically run trains than air polluting cars and planes.

And then also ask ourselves...kinda as anside... does it make sense to rely on improvements to those modes and increasingly rely on foreign fossil fuels... from parts of the world that hate us and would rather see us oblitorated off the planet? Should we really further our dependence on places like those and increase our need to send the military in a secure access to those fossil fuels?

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...l/chsramap.jpg

Derek Jul 1, 2007 6:46 AM

Some stuff from the CCDC Board Meeting 6/27/07:

6. BOARD GRANTS DESIGN APPROVAL FOR 700 WEST BROADWAY (Columbia)
The Board granted design review approval for 700 West Broadway, The Irvine
Company’s 34-story, 470-foot tall office building located on the full-block bound by Pacific highway, Broadway, C Street, and the railroad right-of-way. The project will include 5,200 square feet of retail space, 679,955 square feet of office space and 675 proposed parking spaces. Board approval was made subject to 14 conditions listed in the report including further review and approval of the design for the C Street plaza and the Transit Courtyard frontage. The Board also approved the Coastal Development Permit for the project based on the required findings. (Vote: 6-0 with Director Cruz
absent)

PROJECT UPDATES:
9. BOARD REFERS GASLAMP RENAISSANCE HOTEL ITEM TO JULY 11
REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE (Gaslamp Quarter)
The Board referred consideration of a Second Implementation Agreement for the development and construction of the 334-room, full-service Marriott Renaissance Hotel (located on the southwest corner of the block bounded by Fifth, Sixth and Island avenues and J street in the Gaslamp) to the Real Estate Committee. The Board will review in further depth the feasibility of the schedule of performance, impact of the proposed changes to the structure and the experience of the proposed lessee at the July 11 Committee Meeting. (Vote: 6-0 with Director Cruz absent)

Haven't heard of this one:
Bahia View Condominiums (Bahia View Condominiums, LLC) – Centre City
Site Development Permit for 95 units, including six affordable units, in a 22-story (270 feet) tower and 5,000 square feet of commercial retail, and including the reconstruction of the facades of the locally-designated historic Tourist Hotel, located on an infill site on the south side of Market between 14th and 15th streets
– East Village.

15th & Commercial (Saint Vincent de Paul) – Centre City Conditional Use
Permit to amend Conditional Use Permits to construct a new 12-story building for an existing transitional housing program, with the addition of a child care center and 61 living units at the northeast corner of 15th and Commercial streets – East Village.

Columbia Tower (Columbia Downtown, LLC) – Centre City Development
Permit for a 364-room hotel and 63 residential units with ground-floor retail in a 47-story (470 feet) tower located on the south side of A Street between India and Columbia streets – Columbia.


First & J (Bosa Development) – Marina Development Permit for 178 residential
units and 22,600 square feet of street-level retail in a 39-story (438 feet) building located on the full-block site bounded by J Street and First, Second, and Island avenues. The project will involve an Owner Participation Agreement and the vacation and conversion of J Street into a public park/plaza – Marina.

15th & Market (CJUF II Lankford Market, LLC) – Centre City Development
Permit for a mixed-use project consisting of 274 residential units and 25,000
square feet of retail space in a 5/22 story (240 feet) building located along the west side of 15th Street between Market and G streets. This project is pending completion of revised drawings – East Village.

Shapery Park Tower (12th and A Hotel Partners) – Centre City Development
Permit for a 39-story (407 feet) building with 138 residential units and
approximately 2,500 square feet of commercial space located at the northeast
corner of Eleventh Avenue and A Street. This project is pending completion of
revised drawings – Core.

Monaco (Ghods Builders, Inc.) – Centre City Site Development Permit for 286
units and approximately 9,800 square feet of commercial space in a 34-story
(350 feet) building on the north side of Broadway between Eighth and Ninth
avenues. This project is pending completion of revised drawings – Core.

Riviera Condominiums (Ghods Builders, Inc.) – Centre City Development
Permit for 409 units (31 affordable) and approximately 47,870 square feet of
commercial space in a 37-story (380 feet) building on the north side of A Street between Sixth and Seventh avenues. This project is pending completion of revised drawings – Cortez.

777 Beech (J. Peter Block Companies) – Centre City Development Permit
application for a mixed-use project consisting of 102 residential condominiums
and 18,700 square feet of commercial space in an 18-story building along the
south side of Beech Street between Seventh and Eighth avenues, directly north of the historic El Cortez Hotel building. The revised application was submitted on May 2, 2007 – Cortez.

Haven't heard of this one either:
Grigio (Gray Development) – Centre City/Site Development Permit for 846
residential units (79 affordable) and approximately 33,000 square feet of
commercial space in a 39-story (410 feet) tower located on the full block
bounded by Eighth and Ninth avenues, and A and B streets. The project requires final approval by the Planning Commission, date to be determined – East Village.





Anybody got news on the Mondrian? Or at least the site it's supposed to be built on? I'm sick of the Brake Depot.

<ak/> Jul 1, 2007 7:30 AM

:previous:
apparently Grigio is downscaled Mondrian
Quote:

The block bounded by Eighth and Ninth avenues, and A and B streets

Gray Development is proposing a 42-story mixed-use project with 903 residential units (67 price-restricted) and approximately 47,800 square feet of commercial space on the block bounded by Eighth and Ninth avenues, and A and B streets. No construction schedule has been set.
http://www.ccdc.com/index.cfm?fuseac...propertyID=615


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:16 PM.

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