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)

SDCAL Oct 14, 2023 3:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSW (Post 10056408)
East Village IS seeing a lot of growth and renewal. And it's true that Target is closing a bunch of it's tiny urban stores... it's a failed model that they are scrapping. Organized shoplifting (not homeless people, btw) is indeed a problem in general, but Target wouldn't be the first company to try to justify their failings or shady motivations (Starbucks) on homeless people / crime.

Homelessness is hurting business downtown. I talked to a business owner who moved from 8th Ave to another part of San Diego because he received no foot traffic anymore because customers did not want to wade through tents with peoples belongings strewn all over the sidewalk to go there.

I also attended a conference recently with people from out of town and out of the country, and they were hesitant to leave the hotel to go to restaurants etc downtown because of all the homeless. Someone from India even said it’s looking worse than Mumbai. This isn’t good for our city. I sympathize with people who are on the street through no fault of their own (layoffs, medical/mental problems, etc) and there is no easy solution. As a more than decade long resident of East Village, my view is the quality of life has gone down, not up. Nothing significant has been built here in the last decade that benefits residents. We’ve been taunted with tales of various larger retail coming to the area for more than a decade, and it never materializes. Even Horton plaza is gone which at least was in walking distance. It seems like the only options downtown are either geared towards short term visitors (ballgame goers, conventions, etc) or homeless encampments. I honestly don’t know why anyone would want to live down here anymore. I’m trying to leave but it’s going to take awhile because housing is so expensive. I don’t mean to add a ton of negativity to this board, but I really hope the city planners do something to change the trajectory. I was so excited when I first moved downtown about 15 years ago. There was so much energy and excitement for the potential. But very little of that materialized, and now it’s a depressing collection of fleeting/failing businesses and urine soaked sidewalks. It’s extremely depressing and a huge missed opportunity.

SDCAL Oct 14, 2023 3:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diego_dude (Post 10057367)
I wish more people outside of this thread would talk about how much of an issue our airport is. First, it’s small. Been the busiest one-runway airport in the country for years (just now got overtaken by Phoenix Goodyear actually). And we all know about the plateauing effect of its height limit on downtown. Our skyline would probably resemble something closer to SF by now if we had relocated the airport when we had the chance.

But I actually think the biggest negative effect of the airport location is the land it sits on. We’re basically wasting 663 acres of prime developable land right in the center of the city. For context, downtown as a whole is 1450 acres. If the airport were moved, we would open up land the size of 2-3 east villages for high density development. This would do wonders for the affordable housing crisis and eventually give us one of the most beautiful waterfront skylines in the country. Such a shame. Maybe in a a hundred years they’ll put the airport issue up to vote again

Agree but it’s useless to complain now. The airport is spending billions on the new terminal 1, so there will be no serious discussion about moving it probably for the next 20 years or so (or longer). The only thing that could change that would be a major aviation disaster linked to the poor location which I of course hope never happens, or if the single runway actually starts getting backed-up causing people on a large scale to complain. The runway is something that confuses me. I’ve been hearing for years that we couldn’t sustain the airport with the current one/short runway, in fact I thought it was supposed to be at capacity by now. Not sure how many more years that runway could be sufficient assuming SD sees exponential passenger growth?

Steadfast Oct 14, 2023 4:55 PM

Homelessness is going to take a long time to untangle, for sure.
But in the short term the city could do a lot more to address the overall cleanliness of downtown.
I'm frequently shocked at just how filthy our core is. It's very common to see windblown trash, piles of soiled clothes, food waste, Starbucks cups, dog/human waste.. Frankly, it's embarrassing, and I don't understand why the city doesn't do more to clean up the core.

SDCAL Oct 14, 2023 7:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steadfast (Post 10059315)
Homelessness is going to take a long time to untangle, for sure.
But in the short term the city could do a lot more to address the overall cleanliness of downtown.
I'm frequently shocked at just how filthy our core is. It's very common to see windblown trash, piles of soiled clothes, food waste, Starbucks cups, dog/human waste.. Frankly, it's embarrassing, and I don't understand why the city doesn't do more to clean up the core.

Also roaches. I don’t remember ever seeing roaches downtown a decade ago, I’m sure they existed but not in the numbers we have today. It’s pretty much a given I will see many large ones crawling around on the sidewalk anytime I walk around EV at night.

mello Oct 14, 2023 8:33 PM

Regarding Lindbergh reaching capacity, what is the feasibility of all cargo activity being shifted to Brown Field? That would take a partial load off of SAN if things got too congested. Brown Field has a long run way and plenty of room to expand facilities. I wonder what % of takeoffs/landings are UPS, FedEx, and DHL?

Northparkwizard Oct 15, 2023 2:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 10059405)
Also roaches. I don’t remember ever seeing roaches downtown a decade ago, I’m sure they existed but not in the numbers we have today. It’s pretty much a given I will see many large ones crawling around on the sidewalk anytime I walk around EV at night.

Must not have been here long. LESS ROACHES nowadays.

Will O' Wisp Oct 15, 2023 6:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mello (Post 10059423)
Regarding Lindbergh reaching capacity, what is the feasibility of all cargo activity being shifted to Brown Field? That would take a partial load off of SAN if things got too congested. Brown Field has a long run way and plenty of room to expand facilities. I wonder what % of takeoffs/landings are UPS, FedEx, and DHL?

There was a serious push for this in the early 2000s, to the point of discussions with reps from FedEx and engineering plans being drawn up.

As it stands, Brown Field's runway is only 8000' long, too short for any serious cargo flights. The airport would acquire the junkyards to the west and east and extend the runway up to 11,000'.

The problem came up with the ILS system, which lets aircraft land in bad weather. The airspace requirements for these things are huge, it forms a cone centered on the runway, 9 1/2 miles long and 3 1/4 miles wide at the far end. The cone slopes upward at 34:1, which puts a height limit of about 1500' at the far end. You also have to keep other aircraft out of the cone entirely, which will come up in a minute.

Otay mountain is 6-ish miles from Brown and over 3000' feet tall, so an ILS approach from the east is out of the question. It's actually so tall and so close most aircraft can't safely descend fast enough to reach Brown after flying over it, which leads most to coming from the west and doing a tight 180 right before landing, not the sort of thing you'd really like seeing a loaded cargo plane do (although I've seen a few do it, and let me tell you it's quite a sight).

That was figured out at the time, so the plans done up had the ILS pointing in the other direction. But that ran into the issue of NAS Imperial Beach, which is about 6 miles away to the west. You'd basically have to shut down the airbase every time a cargo plane landed. Naturally, the Navy wasn't very interested in shutting down "the busiest military airport in the nation" and the "the busiest helicopter airport in the world". This being San Diego the military is king, so that idea was pretty much dead.

Without an ILS insurance and logistics became insurmountable issues for the major cargo carriers. There is a current project to revamp Brown Field which would include some cargo elements, but nothing with FexEx, UPS or the like.

Anyway, it wouldn't actually do that much. Cargo is a lot more flexible than pax in terms of scheduling, they're very willing to be shifted around towards the least busy times, including landing at 3am (FYI the curfew only applies to takeoffs and passenger flights). Last study I saw showed removing all cargo from Lindbergh would only gain you a handful of percentage points in terms of capacity.

dl3000 Oct 15, 2023 6:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp (Post 10059599)
There was a serious push for this in the early 2000s, to the point of discussions with reps from FedEx and engineering plans being drawn up.

As it stands, Brown Field's runway is only 8000' long, too short for any serious cargo flights. The airport would acquire the junkyards to the west and east and extend the runway up to 11,000'.

The problem came up with the ILS system, which lets aircraft land in bad weather. The airspace requirements for these things are huge, it forms a cone centered on the runway, 9 1/2 miles long and 3 1/4 miles wide at the far end. The cone slopes upward at 34:1, which puts a height limit of about 1500' at the far end. You also have to keep other aircraft out of the cone entirely, which will come up in a minute.

Otay mountain is 6-ish miles from Brown and over 3000' feet tall, so an ILS approach from the east is out of the question. It's actually so tall and so close most aircraft can't safely descend fast enough to reach Brown after flying over it, which leads most to coming from the west and doing a tight 180 right before landing, not the sort of thing you'd really like seeing a loaded cargo plane do (although I've seen a few do it, and let me tell you it's quite a sight).

That was figured out at the time, so the plans done up had the ILS pointing in the other direction. But that ran into the issue of NAS Imperial Beach, which is about 6 miles away to the west. You'd basically have to shut down the airbase every time a cargo plane landed. Naturally, the Navy wasn't very interested in shutting down "the busiest military airport in the nation" and the "the busiest helicopter airport in the world". This being San Diego the military is king, so that idea was pretty much dead.

Without an ILS insurance and logistics became insurmountable issues for the major cargo carriers. There is a current project to revamp Brown Field which would include some cargo elements, but nothing with FexEx, UPS or the like.

Anyway, it wouldn't actually do that much. Cargo is a lot more flexible than pax in terms of scheduling, they're very willing to be shifted around towards the least busy times, including landing at 3am (FYI the curfew only applies to takeoffs and passenger flights). Last study I saw showed removing all cargo from Lindbergh would only gain you a handful of percentage points in terms of capacity.

Thanks for the insights as always. Assuming you're either in or at least in the know with SDCRAA, I have a sort of dumb question since I think everyone probably knows the answer: ever since the ballot measure for Miramar failed years ago and the implementation of the airport master plan buildout with the green build, taxiways, tank farm and fueling system, and new t1, is any site selection talk among management or board members basically nonexistent since the focus has shifted to building out Lindbergh for the foreseeable future?

At the rate things are going, it seems like there is a greater chance of advances in aircraft technology allowing for greater capacity and adjusting the height limit downtown than relocating, but planes haven't physically changed that much for a long while...

Will O' Wisp Oct 15, 2023 8:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl3000 (Post 10059804)
Thanks for the insights as always. Assuming you're either in or at least in the know with SDCRAA, I have a sort of dumb question since I think everyone probably knows the answer: ever since the ballot measure for Miramar failed years ago and the implementation of the airport master plan buildout with the green build, taxiways, tank farm and fueling system, and new t1, is any site selection talk among management or board members basically nonexistent since the focus has shifted to building out Lindbergh for the foreseeable future?

Zip. Zitch. Zero. Less than zero. The Authority actively discourages discussion about airport relocation, publicly and privately. There's some severe institutional scarring after spending 60 years watching the airport degrade from lack of attention/funding, because "it will just be replaced in a few years".

Honestly, I think we gave up in the 90s, after the joint US-Mexico Twinports proposal collapsed in the midst of the War on Drugs and it became clear Miramar wasn't going to be closed by BRAC.

The last real study I saw was from the late 90s, looked at every scrap of land in the County west of the coastal range. The only rules were you couldn't interfere with the military, couldn't require moving more than 3 million tons of earth, and would relocate more than 30,000 people.

Just for comparison on those last two points, that's a similar amount of earthmoving and relocation as it takes to build major freeways and the like. And we still couldn't find a suitable spot.

The 2006 referendum was more about getting the Airport out from under the Port, which had been using it as a piggybank for decades, and putting an end to the public debate over relocation so we could finally stop neglecting the airport we have. Very few people at the newly formed Authority expected it to pass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl3000 (Post 10059804)
At the rate things are going, it seems like there is a greater chance of advances in aircraft technology allowing for greater capacity and adjusting the height limit downtown than relocating, but planes haven't physically changed that much for a long while...

It's not exactly the aircraft, it's the navigation systems. These have been upgraded in recent years with GPS technology. I suppose we might see some progress out of that eventually, but more in the sense of "maybe in 20-30 years something will happen".

IconRPCV Oct 18, 2023 1:15 AM

Airport
 
Honestly; enough about the airport and its effects on our skyline!

SDCAL Oct 21, 2023 3:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northparkwizard (Post 10059526)
Must not have been here long. LESS ROACHES nowadays.

I’ve lived downtown over 15 years and there’s more nowadays. This was confirmed by the exterminator that services our building as well, he’s not only seen an increase in American roaches but also German roaches in San Diego.

dirt patch Oct 29, 2023 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy-4-SD (Post 10056900)
I was just out in Chicago this past weekend for the Chicago Marathon, and despite all the negative news you hear in the media about the Chi-town, I was impressed by how clean the whole city was. Running a marathon through it and spending a few extra days gave me some time to really get a good feel for it.

The pros:
- Very little homeless, didn't see any at public transit spots or under bridges.
- Clean streets, well paved, good lighting at night, beautiful landscaping
- Pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods, wide sidewalks everywhere
- Great public transit - comes frequently and takes you wherever you need to go.
- LOTS of new development on the north side of downtown where we stayed

Cons:
- Chicago can't compete with the natural beauty & weather of San Diego
- Crime still exists, but seems to be very concentrated in particular neighborhoods from my experience. Downtown & surrounding areas felt very safe.

Downtown San Diego has UNLIMITED potential to grow if you alleviate homelessness and ensure public safety. (1) Got the best weather in the country, (2) we're among top desirable cities for young professionals, and (3) remote work means anyone can live and work in San Diego. In today's day and age, the employee is determining where the employer should set up shop. If people heavily prefer to live in San Diego, we will see more employers move here. We have a strong educational base here (SDSU, UCSD, USD + more) to support more businesses and industry growth.

I think San Diego has some real issues with the homeless (& drug) crisis that need to be properly handled if we are to see downtown continue to excel. The feedback I receive from people I know living downtown is very similar - something along the lines of "it's fun... BUT there are lots of homeless and it's dirty." Even if you live in Little Italy, the second you go to cross the 5 freeway or head south toward C street, you're greeted with lines of homeless tents. I would rather live downtown, but I live in Pacific Beach for this reason... wouldn't want my GF walking at night downtown. I think you're going to see vacancy rates start to rise in the coming months due to the homeless issue.

World-class downtowns like Chicago show us that it doesn't have to be this way. You can claim the weather aiding the homeless issue, but if you go to Miami (which is attracting young adults in droves) you'll see they also have a much cleaner downtown and fewer homeless. If we fix the homeless issue, I believe San Diego can compete head-to-head with the likes of Miami, Austin, and other top growth markets in attracting new investment and residents. Provide a clean, safe, downtown for people to work, live and play, and you'll see downtown San Diego truly boom.

I think we are at a fork in the road of either worsening homelessness and stagnating development or alleviating homelessness and allowing the city to boom.

Thought it'd be worth striking conversation, its been quiet on the forum.

NO need to point out Chicago. Just look at San Jose to the north: very few to no homeless downtown and no drug dealing due to its mayor's tough stance on those issues. Downtown feels safer, cleaner and more vibrant than in the last few years. It just takes political will to alleviate these problems. Now, Downtown SJ is fantastic and the recent researches show great recovery. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=..._&opi=89978449 *from NBC 11 SJ.

SDfan Oct 30, 2023 10:35 PM

Quote:

"Hillcrest would have dozens of 20- and 30-story buildings, more one-way streets, new public promenades and roughly 50,000 more residents under a new land-use proposal unveiled this month by San Diego planning officials. The proposed update to Hillcrest’s blueprint for future growth would allow downtown-style high-rise housing along existing transportation corridors and on revamped versions of the neighborhood’s two large hospital campuses."

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...form-hillcrest
Looking forward to it!

mello Nov 1, 2023 3:19 AM

Wow sounds like Hillcrest is going to be the new Hollywood lol. Maybe all the old boomers who constantly battled density in HC have thrown in the towel.

HurricaneHugo Nov 2, 2023 6:28 AM

Does anybody know what's going up on Home Ave and Gateway Dr I think?

Giant hole in the ground

dirt patch Nov 8, 2023 8:07 AM

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...pi=89978449Not so fast, SD

brg654 Nov 13, 2023 1:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirt patch (Post 10076326)

this is measuring recovery in foot traffic downtown. you have to keep in mind that our downtown is largely residential, meaning much of that foot traffic is locals at home, which is why our downtown appeared to "recover" faster from covid. as companies ramped up return to office, foot traffic declined as fewer people downtown were working from home. additionally, the period measured was march through mid-june 2023. spring 2023 was one of the coldest, rainest springs in recent memory. san diegans don't go outside in cold and rain.

mello Nov 15, 2023 10:51 PM

Do you guys think Peter Seidler's death will affect the Padres masssive development on the parking lot behind Petco? I wonder if it is too late for Stan Kroenke to do an arena there instead if the Padres are no longer interested in moving forward with those residential towers. I would much prefer a nice World Class arena there than in the Midway District. I haven't heard any updates on this project has anyone else? Maybe the higher interest rates are hurting its chances. :shrug:

SDfan Nov 19, 2023 3:08 PM

Saw a permit online for twin 40-story towers with a 23 story along with it in UTC just south of Costa Verde.

https://aca-prod.accela.com/SANDIEGO...howInspection=

See "More Details" and then "Application Information".

Kind of surprised by the height. I thought UTC was more impacted by MCAS Miramar. Anyone have any news or thoughts on this?

Streamliner Nov 19, 2023 7:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDfan (Post 10084103)
Saw a permit online for twin 40-story towers with a 23 story along with it in UTC just south of Costa Verde.

https://aca-prod.accela.com/SANDIEGO...howInspection=

See "More Details" and then "Application Information".

Kind of surprised by the height. I thought UTC was more impacted by MCAS Miramar. Anyone have any news or thoughts on this?

I just saw this on Twitter and came here to see if anyone had additional info. I don't have any additional information, but it's pretty far south of the Miramar flight paths (which tend to veer north toward Sorrento Valley). I imagine a huge outcry from neighbors, which are mostly low-rise apartments/condos. This would be a huge project, and I hope to see it push through unscathed. We need more of these in UTC.


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.