HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #12541  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2017, 1:58 PM
aerogt3 aerogt3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman View Post
While I agree with you 100%, it's been proven that ~50% of housing costs in CA come from regulations.
Source? I believe you, but I'd love to have the data next time I'm arguing this point to someone else :-D
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12542  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2017, 12:50 AM
embora's Avatar
embora embora is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: California
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by embora View Post
Someone asked about the Willmark development (on C Street between Park Blvd and 13th Street) that has been blocked off for a while with little to no action, and he said that it turns out that the tectonic fault that was known to be on the site was a bit further east than anticipated, and that the developer was considering going higher with the eastern building. No one present asked how much higher, but I imagine it would be similar to what had been previously approved.
My assumption that it wouldn't be that the height wouldn't be that much different was way off: I saw a public notice that states that there is now a proposal for the site consisting of a 36 story tall building with 301 units.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12543  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2017, 6:36 AM
The Flying Dutchman The Flying Dutchman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerogt3 View Post
Source? I believe you, but I'd love to have the data next time I'm arguing this point to someone else :-D
From a 2015 UT article:

"The 71-page study, financed with between $50,000 and $100,000 from area builders and the California Homebuilding Foundation, focused on five cities and the unincorporated area of the county.

Based on those cities' building permit processing history over the last three to five years and estimates from about 20 development companies, Reaser's group concluded that regulation could represent up to 55.9 percent or $480,746 of the cost of a new $860,000 apartment or condo in Carlsbad."

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...htmlstory.html

Carlsbad $782,104 $339,214 43.40%
Chula Vista $747,969 $202,167 27.00%
San Diego $969,588 $438,061 45.20%
San Marcos $783,084 $217,051 27.70%
Santee $664,416 $143,002 21.50%
Other cities $830,602 $319,593 38.50%
Uninc. Area $989,319 $305,428 30.90%
Source: Point Loma Nazarene University

Based on homes selling for $600,000 or more.
__________________
"A good walker does not rise dust" -Zen proverb
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12544  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2017, 9:44 AM
aerogt3 aerogt3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman View Post
From a 2015 UT article:

"The 71-page study, financed with between $50,000 and $100,000 from area builders and the California Homebuilding Foundation, focused on five cities and the unincorporated area of the county.

Based on those cities' building permit processing history over the last three to five years and estimates from about 20 development companies, Reaser's group concluded that regulation could represent up to 55.9 percent or $480,746 of the cost of a new $860,000 apartment or condo in Carlsbad."

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...htmlstory.html

Carlsbad $782,104 $339,214 43.40%
Chula Vista $747,969 $202,167 27.00%
San Diego $969,588 $438,061 45.20%
San Marcos $783,084 $217,051 27.70%
Santee $664,416 $143,002 21.50%
Other cities $830,602 $319,593 38.50%
Uninc. Area $989,319 $305,428 30.90%
Source: Point Loma Nazarene University

Based on homes selling for $600,000 or more.
Thanks!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12545  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2017, 3:24 PM
Streamliner's Avatar
Streamliner Streamliner is offline
Frequent Lurker
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 244
Solution for tented homeless? $531M for 2,000 homes proposed by Father Joe's
Roger Showley
March 30, 2017
Union-Tribune
Link to Article



Quote:
Father Joe’s Villages, operator of a 30-year-old downtown campus for the homeless, will announce a $531 million, five-year plan Thursday to produce 2,000 permanent housing units and reduce, if not eliminate, homeless encampments on the street.
...
The remaining $122 million would come from individual donors, corporations, foundations and other private sources.

But raising $100 million a year could be difficult, given the number of grants available, competition among homeless services providers and changing budget priorities at the state and national level.
...
For now, San Diego County ranks fourth nationally with the largest metro homeless population at 8,742 in 2015, up from 8,506 in 2014, federal figures show. The first-place New York metropolitan area had 75,323, followed by Los Angeles with 41,174 and Seattle with 10,122. San Francisco ranked ninth with 6,775.
...
Father Joe’s Villages plan at a glance

New construction:
Penske site: 14th and Commercial streets; 15 stories, 418 units for veterans, families and chronic homeless persons; $112 million in public funds, $33 million private, $145 million total. Highlights: day center, medical clinic expansion, dining expansion and a multipurpose room.
17th & Commercial site: 6 stories, 125 units for seniors and veterans; $33 million in public funds, $14 million private, $47 million total.
Toussaint building: Fifth Avenue and Ash Street: 20 stories, 175 units for families and youth transitioning out of foster homes; $51 million in public funds, $21 million private, $62 million total.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12546  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2017, 1:05 AM
Boatguy619 Boatguy619 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 39
https://www-nbcsandiego-com.cdn.ampp...p=y&amp_js_v=9

I think this could be the coolest thing coming to SD. I really hope it happens
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12547  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2017, 11:04 AM
mbb mbb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Streamliner View Post
Solution for tented homeless? $531M for 2,000 homes proposed by Father Joe's
Roger Showley
March 30, 2017
Union-Tribune
Link to Article
There are clearly problems with concentrating poverty in poor, isolated cities, but 2 bedroom, >1000 sq ft houses in Hemet are currently listed for about $150K on Zillow compared with $265K per (presumably) 1 bedroom or studio in the proposed midrise building. I wonder if there might be a hybrid solution that cuts across different municipalities to provide a range of transitional and permanent housing at lower cost. This of course, would have to be balanced with transit accessibility, and costs of maintenance / support services.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12548  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2017, 4:03 PM
dtell04 dtell04 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDCAL View Post
It's an opinion piece that leaves out a lot of complex reasons for differing regulation and planning styles across cities. I mean comparing Houston and SF? One has room to sprawl and the other is confined to a small peninsula. A lot of housing costs comes from desirability to live in certain places. Many more people would find coastal CA more desirable than humid, swampy Houston. That alone will make prices higher here. I just don't buy the notion that cities like SF could follow the "Houston model" and cure all their problems. Seems like a naive piece.
I thought it was pretty objective - didn't claim that Houston's model was one-size-fits-all, but it did say there things we can learn from it. It's almost like there is some sort of pre-programmed Californian response (like yours) when anyone says "maybe we can do this better." SF does have geographical constraints, but also fights change tooth and nail. I personally do not consider it desirable because of the cost. We have the weather in California, but that's all we have. I would also like to point out that Houston and Dallas both have 2 and 2.5 million more people living there than the Bay Area, respectively. These housing prices limit upward economic mobility and limits the middle class expansion.

Last edited by dtell04; Apr 1, 2017 at 4:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12549  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2017, 9:38 PM
Lipani Lipani is offline
It could be worse!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boatguy619 View Post
https://www-nbcsandiego-com.cdn.ampp...p=y&amp_js_v=9

I think this could be the coolest thing coming to SD. I really hope it happens
Sounds like a great project (being a cyclist, I'd certainly use it). Too bad Coronado Nimbys are the worst in the entire county.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12550  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2017, 9:49 PM
ChargerCarl ChargerCarl is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Los Angeles/San Francisco
Posts: 2,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by spoonman View Post
True, but that street (PCH) is wide because it used to be a "highway" before the 5 Freeway was built in the early 60's.
It's just a common thing I notice throughout Southern California. No matter how good the development is our wide streets kill the pedestrian experience
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12551  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2017, 4:16 AM
SDCAL SDCAL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtell04 View Post
It's almost like there is some sort of pre-programmed Californian response (like yours) when anyone says "maybe we can do this better"
My response was not "pre-programmed," it was my opinion based on reading the article and thinking about what it had to say. If you don't agree fine, but don't imply my opinion is some inferior, knee-jerk, not well thought out one just because it doesn't match your opinion. I see tons of stupid opinions about California covering a wide variety of issues by people outside of this state who base their opinions of CA on crude stereotypes, so the type of thing you are calling out happens in the other direction as well and I could just as easily put your opinion in that box. Nothing stopping you from moving to Texass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12552  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2017, 4:27 PM
aerogt3 aerogt3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDCAL View Post
It's an opinion piece that leaves out a lot of complex reasons for differing regulation and planning styles across cities. I mean comparing Houston and SF? One has room to sprawl and the other is confined to a small peninsula.
Yes, the land areas are different. But SF's zoning has deliberately prevented moving towards the kind of density that would relieve prices. The point the article was making is that SF's zoning is poor and Houston's is not. And that point can be made regardless. Most of SF is zoned for the kind of 2 level, single family housing that should be reserved for distant suburbs. Here's what the article said:

"In its most extreme form, cities like San Francisco continue to enforce startlingly low densities in and around downtown despite burgeoning demand."

Quote:
A lot of housing costs comes from desirability to live in certain places. Many more people would find coastal CA more desirable than humid, swampy Houston. That alone will make prices higher here. I just don't buy the notion that cities like SF could follow the "Houston model" and cure all their problems. Seems like a naive piece.
Do you have any data to support that? Because I would argue that a more desirable area does not have to suffer rapidly rising housing costs; instead, it can maintain affordability by allowing density to rise to meet demand. And SF has absolutely failed on this. Existing home owners fight hard to keep density low and prices high, and then sooth their own consciences by supporting affordable housing projects who help a few hundred people annually at the expense of everyone else but themselves. They screw hundreds of thousands of people into paying higher prices, and then throw a subsidized housing bone to a lucky few.

Aside from that I would argue most people's choice of where to live comes from personal ties and their job, not avoiding humidity and distance from the ocean.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12553  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2017, 10:23 PM
superfishy superfishy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: San Diego
Posts: 31
Looks like construction is beginning on the high rise adjacent to the library. Lots of development in this area. Cant wait to walk around south-east EV when all of this construction is done.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12554  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2017, 10:49 PM
SDCAL SDCAL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerogt3 View Post
Yes, the land areas are different. But SF's zoning has deliberately prevented moving towards the kind of density that would relieve prices. The point the article was making is that SF's zoning is poor and Houston's is not. And that point can be made regardless. Most of SF is zoned for the kind of 2 level, single family housing that should be reserved for distant suburbs. Here's what the article said:

"In its most extreme form, cities like San Francisco continue to enforce startlingly low densities in and around downtown despite burgeoning demand."



Do you have any data to support that? Because I would argue that a more desirable area does not have to suffer rapidly rising housing costs; instead, it can maintain affordability by allowing density to rise to meet demand. And SF has absolutely failed on this. Existing home owners fight hard to keep density low and prices high, and then sooth their own consciences by supporting affordable housing projects who help a few hundred people annually at the expense of everyone else but themselves. They screw hundreds of thousands of people into paying higher prices, and then throw a subsidized housing bone to a lucky few.

Aside from that I would argue most people's choice of where to live comes from personal ties and their job, not avoiding humidity and distance from the ocean.
You've never heard of the concept of a "sunshine tax"? People live in places for a whole host of reasons, and climate is a factor for some. You apparently don't realize San Francisco is already the second densest city in the country with 6,266 people per square mile. How much denser does it need to become before all its problems suddenly vanish and housing prices come down like magic as you think they would? I'm not arguing that the current model works, I'm arguing that the article someone posted that I read doesn't seem to offer much that would actually solve the problems just by replicating what Houston does.

Last edited by SDCAL; Apr 4, 2017 at 12:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12555  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2017, 6:30 PM
Lipani Lipani is offline
It could be worse!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,194
Happening today. Let's see what happens.

City Council Contemplates Project To Replace California Theatre
Tuesday, April 4, 2017
By City News Service

Quote:
A plan to replace the dilapidated California Theatre building in downtown San Diego with a 40-story skyscraper is scheduled to go before the San Diego City Council Tuesday.

The fenced-off building on C Street between Third and Fourth avenues has long been a civic eyesore, with the exception of a large, historic mural touting the Agua Caliente racetrack in Tijuana.

It would be replaced by a mixed-use development consisting of an office tower, 282 residential units, retail space and 314 parking spaces.

A replica of the mural and a depiction of the historic theatre building will be displayed, according to the developers.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/apr/04...lifornia-thea/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12556  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2017, 7:13 PM
Lipani Lipani is offline
It could be worse!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,194
On the bright side (unlike the convention center expansion), this won't require 2/3 voter approval.

SoccerCity headed toward fall ballot; MLS will wait
By Roger Showley

Quote:
The SoccerCity initiative to redevelop the Qualcomm Stadium site in Mission Valley should go on a likely special election ballot this fall, the project’s supporters said Tuesday.

FS Investors said it will ask the City Council to place the measure on a November ballot rather than ask for outright approval of the billion-dollar plan. It would appear on the same ballot as a measure, announced Monday, to raise the hotel-room tax to expand the San Diego Convention Center and generate funds for homeless programs and road improvements.

Mayor Kevin Faulconer is asking the council to set a special election for the tax measure.

The SoccerCity decision came after Major League Soccer said it would delay until after the vote the decision of which proposals for new franchises will be chosen among 12 bidders, according to La Jolla-based FS Investors, the official bidder for a San Diego team.
Full article: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...404-story.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12557  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2017, 10:31 PM
SDfan's Avatar
SDfan SDfan is offline
Registered San Diegan
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 879
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDCAL View Post
You've never heard of the concept of a "sunshine tax"? People live in places for a whole host of reasons, and climate is a factor for some. You apparently don't realize San Francisco is already the second densest city in the country with 6,266 people per square mile. How much denser does it need to become before all its problems suddenly vanish and housing prices come down like magic as you think they would? I'm not arguing that the current model works, I'm arguing that the article someone posted that I read doesn't seem to offer much that would actually solve the problems just by replicating what Houston does.
I'm not usually in agreeance with Aero, however I will say that supply and demand is an economic reality. Here is a good article on how Tokyo has kept housing costs nearly neutral even though it's population and local economy is booming. Also, here is a recent article on how new construction in SF has had a downward impact on rents (albeit relative to their market). New supply does have an impact. Supply and demand is real. The question is whether or not we want to accommodate future generations, or let our region become an exclusive retirement/yuppie community.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12558  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2017, 10:32 PM
SDfan's Avatar
SDfan SDfan is offline
Registered San Diegan
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 879
I don't know how I feel about Soccer City just yet, and please, please, please approve the CA Theater project. That eyesore needs to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12559  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2017, 11:40 PM
ChargerCarl ChargerCarl is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Los Angeles/San Francisco
Posts: 2,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDCAL View Post
You've never heard of the concept of a "sunshine tax"? People live in places for a whole host of reasons, and climate is a factor for some. You apparently don't realize San Francisco is already the second densest city in the country with 6,266 people per square mile. How much denser does it need to become before all its problems suddenly vanish and housing prices come down like magic as you think they would? I'm not arguing that the current model works, I'm arguing that the article someone posted that I read doesn't seem to offer much that would actually solve the problems just by replicating what Houston does.
Supply and demand is magic now huh?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12560  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2017, 12:13 AM
Lipani Lipani is offline
It could be worse!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDfan View Post
I don't know how I feel about Soccer City just yet, and please, please, please approve the CA Theater project. That eyesore needs to go.
I have mixed feelings on SoccerCity as well, but at least by going to a public vote it should receive the debate it needs.

As for the California Theatre...

City Council approves project to replace California Theatre
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 4:48 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.