HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #14121  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 1:41 AM
sandiego_urban sandiego_urban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp View Post
Extremely disappointing. This midget is 3-4 stories shorter than the surrounding blocks and doesn't even meet the minimum FAR requirements. I really hope Civic SD comes back and says they need to make better use of this extremely valuable space.
Agreed. How is this is best use of this space in this location?

Found a couple more renderings on Twitter:








https://twitter.com/RealPortfolioSD
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14122  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 1:47 AM
sandiego_urban sandiego_urban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 969
It appears that First and Beech has undergone a design change for the better. Looks like an updated version of The Grande.



The best part is how it brings height to an area where there currently is none.



https://dcpcsd.files.wordpress.com/2...s_03.25.19.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14123  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 1:50 AM
JerellO JerellO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 283
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneHugo View Post
And now you can buy digital version of games.

Though you can't sell them afterwards
True, but they also sell e-books 🤷🏻♂️ and libraries still exist. Some people like myself still love having a hard copy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14124  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 1:57 AM
sandiego_urban sandiego_urban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 969
Without getting everyone's hopes up, could the City, FAA and City Council really be in discussions to increase the 500ft height limit? We need answers.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14125  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 2:13 AM
sandiego_urban sandiego_urban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 969
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerellO View Post
Also regarding a shopping district in downtown, I think I read along with the California theatre development that the city was looking into making C street a revitalized commercial hub with new retail and stuff. With Horton plaza changing, you think some of the stores would look into opening up storefronts along the street?? C street maybe?? The fact that the trolley line runs through, and eventually under it, is a huge benefit.

As far as Manchester gateway. I really hope that it becomes a destination shopping hub as well.. from the renderings, it could be our version of Santa Monica’s 3rd street promenade.
I agree that C St. would be a great shopping street. Maybe an urban Target could help jumpstart the trend?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14126  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 2:48 AM
SDCAL SDCAL is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 865
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandiego_urban View Post
Without getting everyone's hopes up, could the City, FAA and City Council really be in discussions to increase the 500ft height limit? We need answers.
If it’s true there are discussions going on, that itself is encouraging. It seems like for the last many decades it’s just been an accepted reality that we would have a plateau skyline and no city officials cared to think about changing it.

Is this reliable though? This is the first I’ve heard that any serious discussion was even happening
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14127  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 2:50 AM
SDCAL SDCAL is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 865
deleted, double post
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14128  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 2:52 AM
SDCAL SDCAL is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 865
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandiego_urban View Post
Agreed. How is this is best use of this space in this location?

Found a couple more renderings on Twitter:



That’s embarrassing ☹️

This can’t be allowed to go through, it’s a total waste of that important lot.

Last edited by SDCAL; Apr 13, 2019 at 3:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14129  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 3:03 AM
SDCAL SDCAL is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 865
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerellO View Post
I see Fashion Valley more of the design/high end retail center... much more expensive brands are located there.. it’s been called the rodeo drive of San Diego... which is a bit silly in comparison but I get it
Fashion Valley has limited itself mostly to fashion/clothes.

UTC is becoming a more encompassing center of high end retail with notable fine-dining restaurants and home design stores, some of which are flagship locations that are the only SD County locations.

For example, Crate and Barrel left FV some time ago and they built a large flagship store at UTC.

UTC has Room and Board, a large higher end home store that’s only located, usually with one location, in large metros like NYC, SF, etc.

As mentioned, Design Within Reach is coming to UTC, will be the only SD showroom.

Across from Room and Board is a huge high end appliance kitchen/bath remodeling store that carries brands like sub-zero.

They are building an Equinox gym, the high end chain popular in LA and NY with only one other location in SD (in Solana Beach).

It really seems like UTC is becoming the “it” place for modern high-end retail beyond clothes in SD.

In other large cities you see these types of high end retail downtown (think Chicago’s Michigan Avenue), but I think the person who said it’s probably due to the concentration of high end jobs in the area is right.

In any case, having UTC connected by the trolley will only continue to bolster the area, I think.

I wish downtown would have more mid-level retail though, like an urban target and that kind of thing. Hopefully it will come in the C-street corridor.

And yes, Manchester Gateway should have high end retail, but I think it’s going to be more boutique smaller scale, nothing like the major flagship stores UTC is luring
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14130  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 3:57 AM
aekrid aekrid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandiego_urban View Post
Agreed. How is this is best use of this space in this location?

Found a couple more renderings on Twitter:








https://twitter.com/RealPortfolioSD
While I share the same sentiment that it is too short for the location. It's likely that the foundations cannot support anything taller. The original plans for the One America Plaza complex called for a 15 floor hotel on the site. It's designed to minimally impact the parking garage below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJpDc5eTzRE
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14131  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 4:53 AM
sandiego_urban sandiego_urban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 969
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDCAL View Post
If it’s true there are discussions going on, that itself is encouraging. It seems like for the last many decades it’s just been an accepted reality that we would have a plateau skyline and no city officials cared to think about changing it.

Is this reliable though? This is the first I’ve heard that any serious discussion was even happening
We can only hope that the three groups are talking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14132  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 5:02 AM
sandiego_urban sandiego_urban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 969
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDCAL View Post
Fashion Valley has limited itself mostly to fashion/clothes.

UTC is becoming a more encompassing center of high end retail with notable fine-dining restaurants and home design stores, some of which are flagship locations that are the only SD County locations.

For example, Crate and Barrel left FV some time ago and they built a large flagship store at UTC.

UTC has Room and Board, a large higher end home store that’s only located, usually with one location, in large metros like NYC, SF, etc.

As mentioned, Design Within Reach is coming to UTC, will be the only SD showroom.

Across from Room and Board is a huge high end appliance kitchen/bath remodeling store that carries brands like sub-zero.

They are building an Equinox gym, the high end chain popular in LA and NY with only one other location in SD (in Solana Beach).

It really seems like UTC is becoming the “it” place for modern high-end retail beyond clothes in SD.

In other large cities you see these types of high end retail downtown (think Chicago’s Michigan Avenue), but I think the person who said it’s probably due to the concentration of high end jobs in the area is right.

In any case, having UTC connected by the trolley will only continue to bolster the area, I think.

I wish downtown would have more mid-level retail though, like an urban target and that kind of thing. Hopefully it will come in the C-street corridor.

And yes, Manchester Gateway should have high end retail, but I think it’s going to be more boutique smaller scale, nothing like the major flagship stores UTC is luring
And then there's the complete overhaul of Costa Verde Center, across the street from UTC. My inside source says they are adding more creative office space and keeping the same amount of retail, rather than increase it. The boutique hotel is still a go.

http://costaverdecenter.com/our-vision/#3

http://costaverdecenter.com/wp-conte...eet-031418.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14133  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 5:08 AM
sandiego_urban sandiego_urban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 969
Quote:
Originally Posted by aekrid View Post
While I share the same sentiment that it is too short for the location. It's likely that the foundations cannot support anything taller. The original plans for the One America Plaza complex called for a 15 floor hotel on the site. It's designed to minimally impact the parking garage below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJpDc5eTzRE
I'd be ok with the height if the design was unique. Right now it looks like an old Vegas hotel or a hospital.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14134  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 5:32 AM
Will O' Wisp Will O' Wisp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: San Diego
Posts: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandiego_urban View Post
Without getting everyone's hopes up, could the City, FAA and City Council really be in discussions to increase the 500ft height limit? We need answers.
I haven't heard anything about this, and I'm in a position where it would be at least a little odd for such a huge change not to reach me through the grapevine. I'm meeting with someone next week who would definitely have to be involved in these negotiations for them to have even a scrap of credibility, I'll get back to you.

In any case there's a massive stakeholder missing from these reported talks, and that's the California DOT. They're the ones who actually set the 500' limit, and as a state level agency their rules override SD's local regulations. In addition, the FAA lacks any enforcement powers off-airport so there's nothing at the federal level to override them. Without the CA DOT or at least some leaders from the CA state government all this will amount to is SD asking polity if they can have the height limit removed, which they already have several times in the past and been denied.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JerellO View Post
True, but they also sell e-books 🤷🏻♂️ and libraries still exist. Some people like myself still love having a hard copy.
The city government is actually in the process of building/expand several libraries across the city due to increased demand


Quote:
Originally Posted by aekrid View Post
While I share the same sentiment that it is too short for the location. It's likely that the foundations cannot support anything taller. The original plans for the One America Plaza complex called for a 15 floor hotel on the site. It's designed to minimally impact the parking garage below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJpDc5eTzRE
Wow that video takes me back....

I remember pre-great recession there was a plan to build a 400'+ tower on the site. Maybe that entailed digging up the parking garage though, in which case this shortened height makes some sense. Looking from the video it seems the only major change in the design was the deletion of the top two stories of spire for a restaurant/pool.

Still think we've be better off digging up the whole site and starting fresh.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14135  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 7:20 AM
Steadfast Steadfast is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 44
Oh man... a downtown Urban Target would be absolutely wonderful! I can't count how many times I've had to run up to SP to pick up something from there...
East Village, HP or C Street would all be great locations (as long as it didn't cannibalize the DT Ace Hardware)!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14136  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 5:07 PM
staplesla staplesla is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Downtown Los Angeles
Posts: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandiego_urban View Post
Without getting everyone's hopes up, could the City, FAA and City Council really be in discussions to increase the 500ft height limit? We need answers.

This was discussed on CBS 8 last night. Apparently Mayor Faulconer is looking into it and he’s declared himself a YIMBY. Though they reported a lot of NIMBY’s are raising a fuss over the proposed change. So, it’ll probably come down to who barks the loudest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14137  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2019, 11:06 PM
CaliNative CaliNative is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by staplesla View Post
This was discussed on CBS 8 last night. Apparently Mayor Faulconer is looking into it and he’s declared himself a YIMBY. Though they reported a lot of NIMBY’s are raising a fuss over the proposed change. So, it’ll probably come down to who barks the loudest.
The NIMBY's have 2 choices: either allow greater building density and more affordable housing and shelters, or have camps of homeless living in their neighborhoods.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14138  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 12:20 AM
Will O' Wisp Will O' Wisp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: San Diego
Posts: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by staplesla View Post
This was discussed on CBS 8 last night. Apparently Mayor Faulconer is looking into it and he’s declared himself a YIMBY. Though they reported a lot of NIMBY’s are raising a fuss over the proposed change. So, it’ll probably come down to who barks the loudest.
Falconer can look into whatever he wants, but ultimately this isn't his or the city council's decision to make. This isn't about -imbys or making noise, it's about about standards and enforcement authority. The only opinion that really matters is the one I've yet to see mentioned: Caltrans. Per the California Aeronautics Act:

Quote:
Permit for Extension of Structure More Than 500 Feet Above Ground
21656. No person shall erect or add to the height of any structure within the boundaries of this state which will result in a structure that extends more than 500 feet above the ground on which such structure rests until a permit therefor has been issued for such purpose by the department. This section is not applicable to the construction of any structure if the Federal Communications Commission is required to approve the height of the structure or if the height of the structure is required to be approved under the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (Public Law 85-726; 72 Stat. 731).
Also:

Quote:
Hazards Near Airports Prohibited
21659. (a) No person shall construct or alter any structure or permit any natural growth to grow at a height which exceeds the obstruction standards set forth in the regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration relating to objects affecting navigable airspace contained in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 77, Subpart C, unless a permit allowing the construction, alteration, or growth is issued by the department.
(b) The permit is not required if the Federal Aviation Administration has determined that the construction, alteration, or growth does not constitute a hazard to air navigation or would not create an unsafe condition for air navigation. Subdivision (a) does not apply to a pole, pole line, distribution or transmission tower, or tower line or substation of a public utility.
(c) Section 21658 is applicable to subdivision (b).
Caltrans has stated, in the past, that they will not issue permits for structures taller than 500' if they penetrate a FAR Part 77 surface. KSAN is a Category D airport with a Non-Precision Instrument Approach on Rwy 27 (the runway end facing downtown). This means that the Part 77 horizontal surface extends in a radius of 10,000 feet, measured 200' along the extended runway centerline, at a height of 150' feet. In downtown this surface extends roughly to Petco Park. Extending from this is the Part 77 conical surface, which angles upwards at a 20:1 slope. Then the conical surface takes 4,000 feet to rise up from the 150' of the horizontal surface to 350'. Finally the Part 77 transitional surface rises up at 7:1 for another 1,050' until it finally reaches the 500' level. So Caltrans has said in effect that they will refuse to allow any building taller than 500' within a 15,050' radius (2.85 miles) of KSAN, or any closer than the base of the Coronado bridge. And as you can see, they have absolute authority to do that.

Last edited by Will O' Wisp; Apr 14, 2019 at 1:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14139  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2019, 1:51 AM
Nv_2897 Nv_2897 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: San Diego California
Posts: 90
Holland Development group are proposing a 467 foot Mixed Use highrise along one of the lots where the old courthouse used to be. I honestly kind of like the design




Civic SD: https://civicsd.com/wp-content/uploa...y_Drawings.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14140  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2019, 7:39 PM
SDfan's Avatar
SDfan SDfan is offline
Registered San Diegan
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by staplesla View Post
This was discussed on CBS 8 last night. Apparently Mayor Faulconer is looking into it and he’s declared himself a YIMBY. Though they reported a lot of NIMBY’s are raising a fuss over the proposed change. So, it’ll probably come down to who barks the loudest.
Can you clarify, were they talking about raising downtown's height limit over 500 specifically, or was the piece addressing his recent efforts to raise height limits in transit priority areas generally?

I haven't heard anything about downtown's height limit being raised at all. I think there may be some miscommunication going around.

And Will O' Wisp, thank you for the information on actual rules and regs for the height limit. I've shared with some friends who may actually be able to do something about this...
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:27 AM.

     

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