Quote:
Originally Posted by ShekelPop
If you look at the amount of street festivals, downtown events, and outdoor concerts, I'd say San Diego, in terms of variety of events and number of attendees, far outpaces many of its California counterparts. This demonstrates people are in touch with the city and the different neighborhoods. If you're statement is based on the perception that people frown upon city-funded buildings or other improvements, I also think its tough to gauge what people actually feel since a lot of the current sentiment stems from the fact that San Diego, like many other CA cities, has experienced serious cash flow problems that make even the most civic-minded resident hesitant to support the output of city cash for a marginally beneficial public improvement.
I also think we can't draw conclusions about how people feel simply because they don't want to fund a new stadium for the Chargers (for example). If you look at Petco or the revival of downtown over the past 20 years, you'd be hard pressed to explain to how all of this took place if the majority of people in San Diego did not politically support these types of developments. Keep in mind, this is a forum where people are almost always pro development, and even on here, when plans came out for the convention center expansion, people scoffed at the idea. I think this further shows current public sentiment stems from more than just people in san diego being drab and anti-development but from frustrations that stem from other sources.
|
I disagree.
I'm sorry, but you can't milk the economic crisis for all of San Diego's woes.
The reason people supported the development that took place is because it was private developers building condos. We got no major civic projects, which people would have whined about.
San Diego is a very "non-centralized" city compared to other cities I have lived in and been to.
Residents here prefer living in a "cluster" environment where you are able to live in suburban communities that have everything - - no reason to go to the city center. Other cities have transit designed to bring people to the city centre for jobs, courts, restaurants, museums, etc.
A prime example of this is the library. While the main library downtown rots and the NIMBYs oppose the new library, we have sunk TONS of money into branch libraries over the last decade.
Go look it up - - we have built new libraries and renovated others all over the place in the suburbs of San Diego county, but nobody wants a central library. People would rather not have to go into the central city because it's too inconvenient and they prefer to be self-contained in suburbia.
This is not the case in alot of other places
SO don't blame everything on "cash flow" because San Diego's lack of innovative urban design goes beyond that and into the attitudes of the people.
Even when times were better and development was taking off, all we saw were condos. No major civic spaces ever came to fruition. The library has been planned way before the economic crisis hit, and it never broke ground and will now probably never be built.
Development is always a risk whether the economy is good or bad.
If the economy is good and you embark on a big project, you run the risk of a down-turn by the time the development is ready (Vantage Point)
If you decide to halt everything when the economy is bad, you will be scrambling and left with nothing when times change because these projects take many years to plan, study and build.
I am not saying you need to build every project that is proposed, I'm saying San Diegan's have no vision.
The prime example - - a new City Hall
The project makes financial sense LONG TERM, not SHORT TERM;
To me, it's a no-brainer to start this project during the bad economy when construction prices are lower, and then not have to worry about the impending doom decades to come
Even the most fierce opponents of the new city hall project admit we WILL need eventually. Case in point, City Councilman Carl deMaio says we should "wait 10 years" to build it.
Yeah, wait 10 years and see the price triple!?
again, it's not a matter of IF this project is needed, or IF this projects is financially benneficial to the city, it's whether or not we decide to save money short-term, or to save more money long-term. San Diego is notorious for taking the short-term choice.
This is supposed to go to a vote, and my prediction is it will go down in flames just like the Miramar vote because San Diegan's are visionless and can't think past the next year or two when considering anything with long term benefits, especially if they get wiff of the "T" word (taxes, oh my!!)
If it goes to a vote and voters approve it, I will eat my words, but I don't think it will.