HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #12781  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2017, 1:09 AM
The Flying Dutchman The Flying Dutchman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 206
Good Friday, all

Just thought I would post some news regarding the 13th, Park and C lot that has been vacant/partially demo'd for years now. The old developer apparently sold the rights to another developer that is now turning the lot into affordable housing on a much larger scale (a ~19 story tower vs. the old ~6 story shorty).

They are doing this to avoid including affordable units in another tower, I suspect this is Bosa's doing with all his west side construction going on (Pacific Gate, Savina, etc.)

Wish I had concrete sources to provide, but there will be updates on July 21, 6 p.m. at the next EVRG meeting by CivicSD. Not sure what type of affordable housing it will be, but the entire game is changing now in lieu of the many policies initiated by the City to increase housing affordability. Expect more density along transit!

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/jun/21...ives-homeless/
__________________
"A good walker does not rise dust" -Zen proverb
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12782  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2017, 1:11 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,674
I want to live in San Diego.

If anybody wants to donate to the "Save a Chris Foundation" , please do so.

You can even sponsor a Chris too. Your daily contribution of just $100, can help save a Chris from the hot, and humid wasteland of NJ, into the chill, and beautiful SD region.

(Sad music playing in background)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12783  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2017, 7:23 PM
Boatguy619 Boatguy619 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Shelter Island
Posts: 82
Is there even a possibility of UTC getting a real skyscraper? La Jolla has to be the most nimby city in the country, and there's plenty of room for more mid-rises before the need to build taller. Regardless of a height limit I don't see that skyline growing up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12784  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2017, 9:29 PM
joemamma joemamma is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman View Post
Good Friday, all

Just thought I would post some news regarding the 13th, Park and C lot that has been vacant/partially demo'd for years now. The old developer apparently sold the rights to another developer that is now turning the lot into affordable housing on a much larger scale (a ~19 story tower vs. the old ~6 story shorty).

They are doing this to avoid including affordable units in another tower, I suspect this is Bosa's doing with all his west side construction going on (Pacific Gate, Savina, etc.)

Wish I had concrete sources to provide, but there will be updates on July 21, 6 p.m. at the next EVRG meeting by CivicSD. Not sure what type of affordable housing it will be, but the entire game is changing now in lieu of the many policies initiated by the City to increase housing affordability. Expect more density along transit!

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/jun/21...ives-homeless/
Thanks for info on this. I was curious how this block's plan would affect Smart Corner across the street.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12785  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2017, 7:31 AM
HurricaneHugo's Avatar
HurricaneHugo HurricaneHugo is offline
Category Five
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boatguy619 View Post
Is there even a possibility of UTC getting a real skyscraper? La Jolla has to be the most nimby city in the country, and there's plenty of room for more mid-rises before the need to build taller. Regardless of a height limit I don't see that skyline growing up.
La Jolla Commons was supposed to be 40 stories tall or so and I don't remember much NIMBYism about it
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12786  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2017, 4:39 PM
spoonman's Avatar
spoonman spoonman is offline
SD/OC
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,430
The new resedential tower at UTC will be around 26 floors. Not bad for secondary high rise district IMO. Would love to have seen the 40 story Mandarin Oriental built at La Jolla Conmons that was proposed before the crash. I'm sure we'll see more proposals like this in the future after the new LRT line is completed. There are still some underutilized parcels in the UTC area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12787  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2017, 10:33 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,674
Some nice towers rising aka Ballpark Village and its surroundings.


San Diego, California by San Diego, California, on Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12788  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2017, 10:42 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,674
One more u/c update if I may. I found this angle and photo amazing.

Growing skyline. Can see some crane action. SD's skyline IMO is very proportional. Granted a plataeu I presume due to fight patterns, but it works. And it has the Mountains, and being near the water, the topography works in sync to create a beautiful city scape.

As more density fills the outlying fringes of the skyline mass, it will appear not only wide, but deep, and depth is important for a downtown. Makes if feel grandiose.


Credit: Rick Sunamoto
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12789  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2017, 11:36 PM
SDfan's Avatar
SDfan SDfan is offline
Registered San Diegan
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,055
Thank you, Chris. And if a relocation fund were to ever exist, you should definitely climb aboard.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12790  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2017, 12:54 AM
IconRPCV's Avatar
IconRPCV IconRPCV is offline
Downtowner
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Califonia del Sur
Posts: 409
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
One more u/c update if I may. I found this angle and photo amazing.

Growing skyline. Can see some crane action. SD's skyline IMO is very proportional. Granted a plataeu I presume due to fight patterns, but it works. And it has the Mountains, and being near the water, the topography works in sync to create a beautiful city scape.

As more density fills the outlying fringes of the skyline mass, it will appear not only wide, but deep, and depth is important for a downtown. Makes if feel grandiose.


Credit: Rick Sunamoto
Amazing pic!!

I have no problem with our skyline except this caveat: I wish One America Plaza was like 700 feet tall instead of 500. It would make the skyline so perfect if it rose above the rest, as it is it is lost in the plateau.
__________________
Long live the Republic of California!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12791  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2017, 5:15 AM
HurricaneHugo's Avatar
HurricaneHugo HurricaneHugo is offline
Category Five
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,994
Yeah i think our skyline looks better than many that have 700 footers.

We just got to bridge the gap between the Hyatt and the Marriott.

Hopefully 7th and market does the trick...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12792  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2017, 8:12 AM
SDCAL SDCAL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneHugo View Post
Yeah i think our skyline looks better than many that have 700 footers.

We just got to bridge the gap between the Hyatt and the Marriott.

Hopefully 7th and market does the trick...
What's going on with that project?? Seems impossible to get any updated information. I hope it's not dead like the previous proposals for that site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12793  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2017, 9:36 PM
mello's Avatar
mello mello is offline
Babylon falling
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,605
The perfect spot for a 700 to 800 footer would be where the old courthouse is getting demolished on Broadway, City will be putting that out to RFP soon. That would be right in the center of the skyline and rise out of the plateau beautifully.

(Speaking of that spot on Broadway whats up with the old YMCA building its a gem just sitting there empty shouldn't it be converted to residential?)

The SD skyline has a lot of potential I think the 7th/Broadway and 11th/Broadway Pinnacle project will really improve that section of the Cityscape. If those get built along with 7th/Market the other Bosa Tower across from Pacific Gate and Navy Complex our skyline is going to be pretty bad ass!!

Also would love it if JMI finally built that monster hotel behind Petco now that project has been crickets for years.
__________________
<<<<< I'm loving this economic "recovery" >>>>>
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12794  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 12:40 AM
MyCitySFO MyCitySFO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: South Bay
Posts: 89
New to this forum. Not too familiar with San Diego, even though I have lived my whole life in California (Northern). So if the problem is the airport, why not build a new terminal further away from the CBD? Miramar? Otherwise, I assume, any dreams of a 700 footer is just a pipe dream. Or is it a moot point? The plateau will continue to spread out. City leaders have no plans to move the airport, do they? Couldn't another city nearby have a 700 footer built there? Chula Vista? National City? Tijuana?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12795  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 1:04 AM
spoonman's Avatar
spoonman spoonman is offline
SD/OC
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,430
Correct, the airport is the reason no towers can be over 500ft. If the height limit wasn't in place the city could go 600, 700, 800ft and beyond. SD has a number of existing (and proposed) twin tower buildings that are around or above 40 stories. With a higher height limit, projects like these could be consolidated into one tower in many cases pushing heights into the 700-900+ range (60-90 floors).

The reason the height limit topic comes up frequently is that there is widespread speculation on this board that the city may have some wiggle room in the height limit in certain parts of downtown (particularly those areas closest to the bridge and Barrio Logan). Essentially many are hoping that the city could possibly bump the limit higher as land becomes more scarce. This entire premise is based on the idea that the city actually imposes the height limit and not the FAA.

Last edited by spoonman; Jul 5, 2017 at 1:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12796  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 6:28 AM
HurricaneHugo's Avatar
HurricaneHugo HurricaneHugo is offline
Category Five
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyCitySFO View Post
New to this forum. Not too familiar with San Diego, even though I have lived my whole life in California (Northern). So if the problem is the airport, why not build a new terminal further away from the CBD? Miramar? Otherwise, I assume, any dreams of a 700 footer is just a pipe dream. Or is it a moot point? The plateau will continue to spread out. City leaders have no plans to move the airport, do they? Couldn't another city nearby have a 700 footer built there? Chula Vista? National City? Tijuana?
The city kinda half assed asked voters to vote on a non-binding resolution to kick out the military from Miramar but it failed.

That's really the only option we have since there's very little flat land left in San Diego.

Although we could be innovative for once and build a floating airport lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12797  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 11:57 PM
SDCAL SDCAL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneHugo View Post
The city kinda half assed asked voters to vote on a non-binding resolution to kick out the military from Miramar but it failed.

That's really the only option we have since there's very little flat land left in San Diego.

Although we could be innovative for once and build a floating airport lol
Not only was it non binding, it was over a decade ago. Would be interesting to have a poll done to see if public opinion changed at all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12798  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2017, 2:56 AM
spoonman's Avatar
spoonman spoonman is offline
SD/OC
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,430
^A poll is an interesting thought.

My perception is that more people have come to the realization now that Miramar is the only real option and are now more supportive of the idea. At the same time, SAN has improved tremendously in the past decade in terms of facility growth, improvements, and destinations. I suspect for some folks this is "evidence" that a new airport is not needed (since they are incapable of imagining the future).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12799  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2017, 4:51 AM
Boatguy619 Boatguy619 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Shelter Island
Posts: 82
I can't imagine san diegans kicking out the Marines in favor of a new airport when we're throwing so much at the current one. There's really no need for a larger airport here, LAX is a few hours away, no other cities in America have two major hubs so close. Most our visitors coming from abroad are on long trips visiting all the CA cities not flying into and leaving from SAN. You can fly into SAN from almost any city in the US, and Tijuana internation airport supports 4+ million a year. The only thing the our airport is holding us back on is our downtown height limit, which isn't a big enough deal to move an airport.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12800  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2017, 5:51 AM
CaliNative CaliNative is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 3,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boatguy619 View Post
I can't imagine san diegans kicking out the Marines in favor of a new airport when we're throwing so much at the current one. There's really no need for a larger airport here, LAX is a few hours away, no other cities in America have two major hubs so close. Most our visitors coming from abroad are on long trips visiting all the CA cities not flying into and leaving from SAN. You can fly into SAN from almost any city in the US, and Tijuana internation airport supports 4+ million a year. The only thing the our airport is holding us back on is our downtown height limit, which isn't a big enough deal to move an airport.
I agree. SD has a very nice & increasingly dense skyline capped at 500'. Prior to 1966, No California city had a building over 464' (LA City Hall). The tallest bldg. in S.F. in 1966 was under 500' (Hartford Bldg., 463', 33 stories). Only after 1966 did towers above 500' emerge in LA & SF. Height isn't everything. The only negative to a height limit is a "plateau skyline" or "tabletop" effect where many of the buildings rise to the same height. In San Diego this isn't that noticible, since there is a variety of building heights and shapes. With a 500' limit residential buildings can rise to 40-50 stories and that seems enough. If SD had a higher height limit we might end up with higher but fewer new buildings. A denser, but lower skyline might be better than one with a few really tall ones. Tourists must like the convenience of Lindbergh Field being so close in. No long cab rides.

In the future we might see buildings above 500' rise in the UTC area and Mission Valley.

Last edited by CaliNative; Jul 6, 2017 at 6:20 AM.
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 8:10 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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