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 Apr 13, 2007 5:15 AM

Probably something to do with the NAS there.

Derek Apr 13, 2007 5:16 AM

oh shoot, forgot...

but still, thats a pretty stiff right turn...

Trvlr Apr 13, 2007 5:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek loves SD (Post 2763617)
im not very good at reading air travel...when you say Vancouver-SAN-Manila...does this mean it goes from Vancouver to SD and then Manila? im just curious:)

The flight would go Manila-->Vancouver-->San Diego on the way from Asia and San Diego-->Vancouver-->Manila on the way back.

I'm sure Philippine (henceforth known as PAL) would love to serve the route nonstop, but Lindbergh Field is simply too operationally restricted (see above posts) for a plane to get out of there nonstop. Indeed, the flight from anywhere in California to the Philippines is so long that PAL often requires fuel stops, even from LAX and SFO. I believe flights from LAX and SFO stop in Guam now.

Conceivably, PAL could operate Manila-San Diego nonstop, as the operational restrictions do not affect landings, and tailwinds increase aircraft range when traveling east.

As with their route from Manila to Las Vegas, PAL has chosen Vancouver as the intermediate stop to and from Asia. This way, PAL can gain extra revenue by selling tickets on the U.S.-Canada-U.S. portion of the route. Foreign carriers are not allowed to sell tickets on flights between two cities within the United States, which renders something like Manila-LAX-SAN unprofitable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 2764248)
Probably something to do with the NAS there.

Which reminds me--aircraft landing on the main east-west runway at North Island actually shoot the Lindbergh Field approach before banking left to line up for NZY (airport code for North Island). This practice might reduce the "safety zone" between arriving aircraft and buildings in Little Italy/Columbia.

-Trvlr

sandiego_urban Apr 13, 2007 6:29 AM

Here's the first peek at Bosa's First and Island project. What do you think? It looks like Miami has finally come to San Diego.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...d1stAvenue.jpg

First & J (Bosa Development) – Marina Development Permit for 172 residential units and 22,600 square feet of street-level retail in a 38-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.

bmfarley Apr 13, 2007 6:49 AM

Looks pretty nice, today. But, I wonder how timeless it is. It could go the way of 1960's and 1970's era buildings... ya know, look dated / old over time.

sandiego_urban Apr 13, 2007 7:02 AM

Recently, CCDC hosted a workshop regarding the state of downtown. Check out what some people had to say. I've highlighted the topics that we've all discussed in detail before, and you can also listen to the dialogue by clicking here http://www.kpbs.org/news/local?id=7901



CCDC Hosts Architects to Discuss Downtown Revitalization


The Navy Broadway Complex and the Embarcadero are not the only parts of downtown San Diego on the verge of profound change. The city’s downtown redevelopment arm, the Center City Development Corporation, held a workshop yesterday with several nationally recognized architects, to brainstorm on how to make San Diego’s downtown a place to be proud of. KPBS reporter Alison St John has more.

San Diego’s downtown is transforming rapidly. As of January this year, there were more than 3,000 condominiums under construction, with another 7,000 in the pipeline. Hundreds of thousands of square feet of retail and office space are going up, and the Downtown Community Plan calls for 85,000 people to live within its 1,500 acres.

Architect Karen Alschuler from San Francisco put the workshop in a national context.

Alschuler: We’re seeing all over the United States people moving back into our cities. People are looking for life and activities and culture things that can only happen at the hearts of great cities. The implications are that we have to really focus on density. What’s good density, how can we live well, live better at higher densities?

About 100 San Diegans showed up to hear about visions for downtown, including Don Roodesil who lives in neighboring Mission Hills. Roodesil says downtown is vital to the health of his neighborhood because the higher density housing being built downtown will take the pressure off older communities like his. But he visits downtown a lot and hopes it doesn’t turn into a bunch of high rises.

Roodesil: Come to the restaurants, walk the embarcadero, count the number of cranes and you can usually tell by how high the cranes are is how high the buildings are going to be.

Downtown is in some ways a symbol of the whole city. San Diego resident Marty Kraasberg spoke at the workshop about making a downtown that doesn’t look like just any other city

Kraasberg: This is a high tech community, the aerospace, the military, biomedical. We are one of the smartest and most brilliant universities. Why does our community not reflect that and look like a city of the 21st century?

Krasberg suggested using more innovative building materials to really distinguish the City’s core from other urban landscapes.

Architect Paul Whalen from New York said the extraordinary pace of growth recently in San Diego’s downtown is one of the challenges.

Whalen: I think the level of every day residential architecture that’s being built in San Diego is maybe the best in the country, and it’s certainly better than the stuff that’s being built in New York. The problem is a lot of it’s being built at the same time. There’s a danger that it could all start to look a little the same.

Gwynne Pugh, a panel member from Santa Monica said San Diego has some unique characteristics. For example, all the earthquake faults than run under downtown mean there are spaces where highrises can’t be built, and small pocket parks can go in. But Pugh urged San Diego architects to be braver and have more spirit.

Pugh: I would like to see the city really develop that and let itself go. I think it’s been holding itself back. You don’t have any buildings in the downtown area which is “wow you’ve got to go see that building when you’re in San Diego.”

But Pugh says it’s not just about the buildings, it’s the space between them, the streets that make the character of a city. He emphasized the importance of walk-able neighborhoods, but quoted a daunting statistic. It takes about 1,600 households to support two blocks of vibrant walk-able retail stores on both sides of the street . That’s higher density than San Diego is used to.

Howard Elkus, a nationally known architect from Boston challenged the city to take advantage of its world class weather and location

Elkus: It has fantastic assets. You are willing to take chances, you are looking to the future, not dwell on the past. There’s no reason why this city can’t be on the cutting edge of what’s happening in our cities.

A group of San Diego architects leaving the workshop were glad a dialogue has started about how downtown’s public spaces could be designed. But architect Don Blair couldn’t help coming back to a very practical reality

Blair: One of the problems we have is the prices have escalated from the late 90s from less than $200 a square foot to well over $650 a square foot today. It’s very difficult for a developer to say “where’s my return in that”? So this issue of creating public uses within private enterprise areas is a dilemma.

Yesterday’s workshop is the first in a series the Center City Development Corporation plans to hold this year, to generate creative ideas that hopefully, developers can use as they rapidly build out San Diego’s downtown . Alison St John, KPBS News.

sandiego_urban Apr 13, 2007 7:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2764346)
Looks pretty nice, today. But, I wonder how timeless it is. It could go the way of 1960's and 1970's era buildings... ya know, look dated / old over time.

Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. It sorta reminds me of one of those Honolulu towers built back in the 70's. I don't know...if we have only one tower that looks like this, perhaps it will stand the test of time.

On the plus side, it certainly doesn't look as Vancouverish to me. It could just be the palm trees and mountain thunderstorms in the background.

spoonman Apr 13, 2007 7:44 AM

I'm glad Bosa is going for a slightly different look, but to me it looks like an overgrown greenhouse. I would like to see more sleek towers with recessed balconies.

Derek Apr 13, 2007 1:34 PM

i dont think that rendering is very bad at all...i like it:)

Urban Sky Apr 13, 2007 3:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek loves SD (Post 2764602)
i dont think that rendering is very bad at all...i like it:)

I agree. The problem that you guys are seeing above (i think) lies within the ornamentation on top of the building. The top IS very "Miami". If that wasnt there, it would look just like a regular building in San Diego.

Referring to the article, one of the architects mentions that since so many buildings are going up at the same time in the same era of design, a lot of the buildings may end up looking the same. He encourages architects to be bold and try new things.

I think this design accomplishes that. Dated architecture is better than too much homogeneous-ness in a city.

Urban Sky Apr 13, 2007 3:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Sky (Post 2763272)
yes, it is preaching to the choir :yes: :haha: I have the same questions myself and there is no really good reasons that I know of. I've seen several aborted landings when I lived in Bankers Hill (which is pretty much under the flight path) and NONE of them actually TURNED towards downtown during the sequence of events that followed. Even during fog they still go straight....AND when the fog is thick enough, the land in the opposite direction. So I don't get it either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress (Post 2763769)
About #2, I think the issue is that there is an emergency/backup/secondary flight path that runs directly over downtown, including the East Village. So, while planes never fly over downtown, they technically could. ;)

It doesn't seem like it would require an act of congress to choose another emergency flight path though.


Yes, they technically *could*, but a route over downtown would make the LEAST amount of sense. Think about all the un-obstructed airspace in front of them and 45 degrees to both sides of that. Why bother flying over downtown when you can just fly around it and avoid the 500' tall structures?

As far as flying over North Island, I know it's completely possible, and I am absolutely sure that these two control towers work very closely with each other. I don't have any solid proof of this, so maybe someone that knows more about aviation could verify this, but from a few things I've seen, ATC for these two runways looks very synced. I've seen a 747 fly over lindberg field, make a hard left and land at North Island...I know, weird, I couldnt believe it myself...

But anyway, the whole FAA restriction still sounds kinda lame to me.

eburress Apr 13, 2007 3:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2764346)
Looks pretty nice, today. But, I wonder how timeless it is. It could go the way of 1960's and 1970's era buildings... ya know, look dated / old over time.

I would like to see the building from some other angles, but based on this rendering, I couldn't agree more.

eburress Apr 13, 2007 3:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Sky (Post 2764847)
Yes, they technically *could*, but a route over downtown would make the LEAST amount of sense. Think about all the un-obstructed airspace in front of them and 45 degrees to both sides of that. Why bother flying over downtown when you can just fly around it and avoid the 500' tall structures?

But anyway, the whole FAA restriction still sounds kinda lame to me.

I realize a downtown flight path makes no sense, but regardless, I believe that is the reason why there are height limits over all of downtown.

bmfarley Apr 13, 2007 3:30 PM

What makes the tower look different to me is the concrete hard surface treatment at the top. Otherwise, it appears there is a lot of glass to the building. I am not opposed to that... just that it's a really hard-edged building and seems more old-world (60's - 70's) to me because of the concrete roof treatment. If that were done away with... well, I think the look of the building would change dramatically, yet still have the same mathmatical massing. The more I think about the image.... it does not seem like it would stand the test of time. Perhaps if different color treatments were applied?

bmfarley Apr 13, 2007 3:33 PM

About the secondary approach/departure landing to Lindbergh... I was under teh impression that that was discontinued or abandoned by the airport authority only recently. In fact, I think it was mentione din the news and discussed a bit on the previous San Diego thread???

eburress Apr 13, 2007 3:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmfarley (Post 2764893)
About the secondary approach/departure landing to Lindbergh... I was under teh impression that that was discontinued or abandoned by the airport authority only recently. In fact, I think it was mentione din the news and discussed a bit on the previous San Diego thread???

If that is the case, then it doesn't seem like there is any reason why taller buildings couldn't be built in that part of downtown - unless North Island is also to blame.

dl3000 Apr 13, 2007 5:40 PM

Yeah wasnt there a secondary general aviation runway, I think they converted it to something like a cargo ramp is I think the term. That runway was pointed straight at downtown and probably the cause of the height restriction, only reason it isnt gone now is that they probably dont want to lose the airspace above 500' just because then they'd have less flexibility, they being the authority or whoever is in charge of that stuff.

keg92101 Apr 13, 2007 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandiego_urban (Post 2764324)
Here's the first peek at Bosa's First and Island project. What do you think? It looks like Miami has finally come to San Diego.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...d1stAvenue.jpg

First & J (Bosa Development) – Marina Development Permit for 172 residential units and 22,600 square feet of street-level retail in a 38-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.

This to me is a mediocre 60's 70's building, which is what all poor attempts of Richard Meier knock off Buildings are. This look done right is below...

http://www.mandevilleplace.com/images/photo5_lg.jpg

Derek Apr 14, 2007 2:58 AM

^i dont like the one in the magazine...:shrug:

but i do like ours...

eburress Apr 14, 2007 3:30 AM

Aesthetically pleasing buildings always get thinner as they get taller, which is partly why this one is so attractive...

http://www.mandevilleplace.com/images/photo5_lg.jpg

...and why this one might not be.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...d1stAvenue.jpg

Like I said before, I would have to see ours from other angles, but based on this rendering, ours doesn't look too hot.


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:24 PM.

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