SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2

[dboakland]

Yah, the same thing that keeps San jose low-rise too. Lots of wonderful jet engine noise also. Maybe some day they'll relocate the airport to Miramar

[mello]

Or a developer with some balls or gravitas decides to challenge the FAA/City who ever enforces these silly rules. I think the lot behind Petco Park that JMI owns is very far from the flight path and a 750 footer there could get done, or 1st and Island is way south and BOSA could push for a 700 foot plus.

[spoonman]

Originally Posted by GuardianChief

Anyone knows will SD ever get built some skyscrapers of sizes (in terms of height) such as LA's or Boston's, or that of any major U.S. city?

Such a shame for California's second largest city to have low-rise buildings all over the place.

You sound like a troll. I didn't know 45 floors was considered "low rise"

[northbay]

Personally, I think San Diego's skyline is awesome!

[Northparkwizard]

Might have been posted here before but I just found the Ballpark Village "Workzone Cam".

http://www.workzonecam.com/projects/...ge/workzonecam

[HurricaneHugo]

Originally Posted by northbay

Personally, I think San Diego's skyline is awesome!

It is but imagine a 750 footer right in the middle...

[eburress]

Originally Posted by spoonman

You sound like a troll. I didn't know 45 floors was considered "low rise"

That's not what he meant, but 45 floor max buildings isn't anything to be proud of either.

[SDfan]

Originally Posted by spoonman

You sound like a troll. I didn't know 45 floors was considered "low rise"

While 45 stories isn't a low rise and is a high-rise, it's definitely not a skyscraper.

[IconRPCV]

I love our skyline, and while it would be nice to have some tall guys, I think our dense all around 500 feet makes us unique.

One America Plaza would look really amazing rising above the rest at 650 or so, I must admit.

[mello]

So what is your take on the entire convention center mess. Looks like Briggs is in bed with John Moores and JMI to push his agenda of an annex so Moores can build his huge 1600 room twin 500 footer hotel. He is going to fight and block any effort for a contiguous expansion. He also wants to up the hotel tax which is the one thing I agree with and will cover the cities share of annex and stadium over the years because it will go in to general fund.

I'm not sure if just an annex would be built alone or if it would need to be tied to a stadium? What have you guys heard? At this point I just want something to get done and those huge parking lots behind PETCO and the bus depot to go away so sick of that giant black hole in downtown. I don't see any other way the 4 sq. block bus depot goes anywhere in the next 25 years.

Also having the entire Qualcomm property to build an SDSU extension and housing would be pretty huge it could give you synergy with what the city is trying to do at Grantville. Speaking of Grantville any renderings of what that would look like yet?

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by IconRPCV

I love our skyline, and while it would be nice to have some tall guys, I think our dense all around 500 feet makes us unique.

One America Plaza would look really amazing rising above the rest at 650 or so, I must admit.

The denser it gets with buildings right around 500 ft, the more it looks like a plateau skyline. Some diversity in height would look a lot better, even just ONE significantly taller skyscraper piercing through the skyline would break-up the monotony and make it look a lot better.

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by mello

So what is your take on the entire convention center mess. Looks like Briggs is in bed with John Moores and JMI to push his agenda of an annex so Moores can build his huge 1600 room twin 500 footer hotel. He is going to fight and block any effort for a contiguous expansion. He also wants to up the hotel tax which is the one thing I agree with and will cover the cities share of annex and stadium over the years because it will go in to general fund.

I'm not sure if just an annex would be built alone or if it would need to be tied to a stadium? What have you guys heard? At this point I just want something to get done and those huge parking lots behind PETCO and the bus depot to go away so sick of that giant black hole in downtown. I don't see any other way the 4 sq. block bus depot goes anywhere in the next 25 years.

Also having the entire Qualcomm property to build an SDSU extension and housing would be pretty huge it could give you synergy with what the city is trying to do at Grantville. Speaking of Grantville any renderings of what that would look like yet?

Many may disagree with me, but I believe a non-contiguous convention center expansion and a downtown football stadium are both bad ideas. I won't go into the football thing because we have debated it at length previously on this board and, as far as I know, it's not being moved forward as a serious proposal any longer. As far as the convention center, I don't see why large conventions would book somewhere they need to shuttle people back and forth to if there are other places where everything can be under one roof. Those really large conventions already have so many different considerations for the planners to consider, who wants to deal with the added logistics of shuttling people back and forth. I think we should proceed with the proposal to expand the current convention center and have a public park on the roof as proposed to satisfy coastal commission requirements for public access at the bay front.

I don't trust Corey Briggs. He sells himself as a watchdog for the community, but he seems to be tied to certain developers and agendas himself. I don't think anybody is really clear who he's working for.

[Bertrice]

Ballpark village
image from twitter

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by northbay

Personally, I think San Diego's skyline is awesome!

I agree 100%. Even though LA has taller iconic buildings, our skyline is so much more beautiful. It's really starting to fill in.

[HurricaneHugo]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

I agree 100%. Even though LA has taller iconic buildings, our skyline is so much more beautiful. It's really starting to fill in.

Yeah LA's skyline is like 10 tall buildings spread out.

San Diego's is like 30 smaller buildings with good density

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by HurricaneHugo

Yeah LA's skyline is like 10 tall buildings spread out.

San Diego's is like 30 smaller buildings with good density

When I drive by LA's downtown, though, I really get a sense for how large those buildings are. Not just height, but even the girth and overall size does have a certain wow factor. Not only are the towers in San Diego not that tall, they also seem much narrower (part of it is probably designed that way to make them look taller). Of course, height and size isn't everything and SD has LA beat in terms of downtown walk ability and street level experience. We are also a waterfront dt, something LA will never be able to compete with.

[dales5050]

Originally Posted by SDCAL

As far as the convention center, I don't see why large conventions would book somewhere they need to shuttle people back and forth to if there are other places where everything can be under one roof. Those really large conventions already have so many different considerations for the planners to consider, who wants to deal with the added logistics of shuttling people back and forth. I think we should proceed with the proposal to expand the current convention center and have a public park on the roof as proposed to satisfy coastal commission requirements for public access at the bay front.

Removed the stadium stuff to focus on your CC point. SO MUCH THIS!

The one opinion I want to add is the idea of 'public access to the bay' is a crock of BS.

There are plenty of places along the bay to provide access. Just look at the land near the airport where the car rental agencies used to be located. Make that a massive park for the public and leave the 'convention strip' alone and build out to drive convention business.

The idea of including access at each point along the bay, this 'mixed access' if you will, only dilutes each section to not be the best it can be. Have focus areas instead.

Originally Posted by SDCAL

I don't trust Corey Briggs. He sells himself as a watchdog for the community, but he seems to be tied to certain developers and agendas himself. I don't think anybody is really clear who he's working for.

Anyone who trusts Briggs is someone not worthy of trusting. That guy is pond scum.

[patriotizzy]

Originally Posted by SDCAL

When I drive by LA's downtown, though, I really get a sense for how large those buildings are. Not just height, but even the girth and overall size does have a certain wow factor. Not only are the towers in San Diego not that tall, they also seem much narrower (part of it is probably designed that way to make them look taller). Of course, height and size isn't everything and SD has LA beat in terms of downtown walk ability and street level experience. We are also a waterfront dt, something LA will never be able to compete with.

I just went to LA for the first time 2 weeks ago. Let me prephase it by saying that I work in San Francisco, so I'm used to density and skyscrapers. However, I was blown away by the sheer enormity of LA's buildings. They are HUGE. Also, the skyline never impressed me in any of the pictures I saw, but seeing it in person I was awestruck!

Staying on topic, I've never been to San Diego, but it's on my to do list! My friend has nothing but good words about it.

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by patriotizzy

I just went to LA for the first time 2 weeks ago. Let me prephase it by saying that I work in San Francisco, so I'm used to density and skyscrapers. However, I was blown away by the sheer enormity of LA's buildings. They are HUGE. Also, the skyline never impressed me in any of the pictures I saw, but seeing it in person I was awestruck!

Staying on topic, I've never been to San Diego, but it's on my to do list! My friend has nothing but good words about it.

Come down for a visit! Our downtown area is great and a lot more improvements going on. Also, don't miss Balboa Park if you've never been here before. You are right about LA's skyline, it's much more impressive in person than in pictures, mainly because of the enormity of the main skyscrapers.

[JerellO]

Originally Posted by patriotizzy

I just went to LA for the first time 2 weeks ago. Let me prephase it by saying that I work in San Francisco, so I'm used to density and skyscrapers. However, I was blown away by the sheer enormity of LA's buildings. They are HUGE. Also, the skyline never impressed me in any of the pictures I saw, but seeing it in person I was awestruck!

Staying on topic, I've never been to San Diego, but it's on my to do list! My friend has nothing but good words about it.

I live in San Diego, Hillcrest and get impressed by our skyline everytime I drive on the 5 north or south I'm really excited about the new Horton Plaza park.. Anyways you're right about DTLA. In pictures and from far away, like the Griffith observatory, LA's skyline looks tiny, but that's because you really are THAT far away.. and the only prominent buildings are the enormous office skyscrapers of bunker hill and the financial district, remember San Diego's tallest is only 500ft and is narrow. While LA's is 1018ft and wide. So just imagine SD's skyline at the same distance.. It would look tiny and squatty. You go up close and walk in DTLA and you'll see how large those buildings are.. And you realize that DTLA really is dense and rich in beaux arts and Art Deco beauty, something San Diego has very few of.. you just need to walk around the historic core, down 7th st, and the Broadway theatre district, or look on google maps or that iPhone 3D maps thingy.

A lot of people don't know about those areas because the historic buildings were built at a time when LA had a 150ft height limit.. But it's there Very gritty and NYC in the 70s.