daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > North American Skyscrapers Forum > General > NASF Archive



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


 

 
Thread Tools
Old August 16th, 2006, 09:05 AM   #101
sd_urban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 890
Likes (Received): 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coastal SD
It is going to take more retail sites (the opening of the Albertson's in the East Village will be huge and I'm sure downtown would also embrace a specialty grocer like Whole Foods Market or Trader Joe's), everyday convienences like casual dining (not luxury resturants), and especially public parks to attract people to call downtown home in the upcoming years.
I've heard that Whole Foods has been looking for a downtown site for some time now, this goes back to the ParkLoft project. I'm hoping they will open at the soon to be re-vamped and repositioned Horton Plaza Mall.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coastal SD
although San Diego always has been and always will be a "Beach Town" in my opinion
I think being a big beach town is the best thing about this city and it's what gives us personality. It's just an added bonus that we are becoming known for our increasingly urban and vibrant core.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solongfullerton
I wasn't sure where to post this, but this seems to be close enough. anyways, my parents just purchased a place at Gaslamp Square at 4th and Island i believe. does anyone have any thoughts or experiences with this place?
Congrats on your parents purchase! Both Mongozx and chicbicyclist have it right by saying that Gaslamp Square is in the middle of everything good. If an urban living is what you are your parents are looking for, then the location can't be beat. If I'm not mistaken, both Puma are Quiksilver are just two of the ground floor tenants of this mixed-use development. My advice is to keep a bike down here, that way you can bike around instead of drive to places like Balboa Park/Hillcrest, Shelter/Harbor Islands and Coronado (via ferry, of course), etc.
sd_urban no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old August 16th, 2006, 09:12 AM   #102
sd_urban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 890
Likes (Received): 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by mongozx
Me thinks this is a funky looking building. I wouldn't mind getting it built but I'm sure sbamberger will say "It's DEAD"

Even a great rendering (thanks, sbaumberger) of this project isn't enough to make me like this one.
sd_urban no está en línea  
Old August 16th, 2006, 10:07 AM   #103
chicbicyclist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 172
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
My advice is to keep a bike down here, that way you can bike around instead of drive to places like Balboa Park/Hillcrest, Shelter/Harbor Islands and Coronado (via ferry, of course), etc.
Make that an electric motorized bicycle. Those hills can be a killer if you're not into cycling full time.

:owns two electric bikes::
chicbicyclist no está en línea  
Old August 16th, 2006, 11:14 AM   #104
dtsd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 43
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by keg92101
The Navy was GIVEN this land to bring the Navy here to San Diego.
Exactly, youíd think that after being given the property, for navy purposes, theyíd have a little respect for San Diego when redeveloping it for nonmilitary use. After gifting the property to them they turn around and try to make the biggest buck off it they can. Real nice. Letís stop pretending the military is being altruistic towards San Diego and that we owe them something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keg92101
After being such an asset to our region, why should they have to pay FMV? .
The point regarding FMV was that itís a good economic test. Itíd never get built if they had to pay the true price. Off topic, but in response to your question about why an asset should have to pay FMV, itís just good economic policy. Should we be subsidizing Qualcommís land because they bring thousands of high paying jobs? Most would say no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keg92101
And, for the record, I'm sure, if FMV is $100 million, Pappa Doug will be paying at least that for that new facility.
Of course. One would expect the FMV to be roughly the cost of constructing the Navyís building and the land it sits on. Thatís what Manchester is effectively paying for the rest of the property.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keg92101
Also, the majority of people that work there are civilians that work on all of their Southwest Div RFP's. But hey, forget what the Navy has done for the region, and better yet, with Downtown starving for high paying jobs to move into the CBD, lets ship out 1000 of these high paying jobs to best serve the public. Personaly, I want the CBD that I live in to evolve into a true world class CBD.
First, if weíre going to play favorites why not just hand the property over to Qualcomm or SAIC since they employ thousands more people still? This is clearly not how policy should be set. Second, thereís nothing that says they have to leave downtown at all. They could construct a much more modest structure on much more affordable land in East Village, which frankly would be a nice catalyst for development in an area still dominated by abandoned warehouses and parking lots.

Last edited by dtsd; August 16th, 2006 at 11:31 AM.
dtsd no está en línea  
Old August 16th, 2006, 07:13 PM   #105
sbaumberger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 56
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by sd_urban
Even a great rendering (thanks, sbaumberger) of this project isn't enough to make me like this one.
Thanks guys - actually I don't know if this one is completely dead or not. At best it's unlikely though (for the reasons I've already pointed out). This just isn't that great of a site for residential development - the cancelled Atmosphere project is only a block away. I really think downtown would be better served by commercial & mixed-use projects in this area. Oh, and how is that Cortez Hill neighborhood center coming along?

And FWIW, Pacific Gateway is becoming an ever-increasing shitstorm and every day that goes by makes it more clear that the site will revert to BRAC early next year. Manchester will profit from the inevitable lawsuits that will be filed as a result. The Navy will move its offices out of downtown. And perhaps the Port will be shamed into loosening its grip on the North Embarcadero. Only then will a project worthy of the site become possible. At the risk of being flamed again, I still think this is the best outcome.
__________________
BaumbergerStudio - Architectural Illustration
www.baumbergerstudio.com/
sbaumberger no está en línea  
Old August 16th, 2006, 09:41 PM   #106
dtsd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 43
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbaumberger
And FWIW, Pacific Gateway is becoming an ever-increasing shitstorm and every day that goes by makes it more clear that the site will revert to BRAC early next year. (...) Only then will a project worthy of the site become possible. At the risk of being flamed again, I still think this is the best outcome.
No you're spot on, that's great news. With the Navy trying to grab as much as it can at the expense of the public, and refusing to revisit the obsolete development agreement, the best option is to go through BRAC with the overwhelming likelihood of the City gaining control of the land.

Last edited by dtsd; August 16th, 2006 at 09:55 PM.
dtsd no está en línea  
Old August 16th, 2006, 10:38 PM   #107
keg92101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 46
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtsd
No you're spot on, that's great news. With the Navy trying to grab as much as it can at the expense of the public, and refusing to revisit the obsolete development agreement, the best option is to go through BRAC with the overwhelming likelihood of the City gaining control of the land.
Great, now it will be another 15-20 years before anything comes up again with that site....
keg92101 no está en línea  
Old August 16th, 2006, 11:01 PM   #108
ASupertall4SD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 523
Likes (Received): 2

DTSD wont be happy until we have a big park on that entire location. A stupid park. Green grass is not that cool, and you know why. Because grass grows anywhere. I can go 5 minutes north and have tons of grass next to the water, in mission bay. Especially considering that Fiesta Island is in the works to be developed into what much of it will be a BIG OL WATERFRONT PARK. I can also go 5 minutes east and have tons of grass in a big park called balboa park. There is only one spot highrises and vibrant life and urban environment exist in our county. That is downtown. Take your tree hugging antics and concentrate on fiesta island if you have a hard-on for the grass and water mixture. The Pacific Gateway project is a great idea, looks fantastic and accomodates more than the community plan blueprinted. Get over it, a park isnt going in there. So drop that horrible idea. That location is perfect for what they have designed, a step ladder type development with open space for ground level shops and such, hotels, offices, and living. Add a museum too and nice architecture and the project is a winner in my book. Im glad you are not making any decisions for this city. VERY VERY glad.

Last edited by ASupertall4SD; August 16th, 2006 at 11:07 PM.
ASupertall4SD no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 12:22 AM   #109
sbaumberger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 56
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASupertall4SD
DTSD wont be happy until we have a big park on that entire location. A stupid park. Green grass is not that cool, and you know why. Because grass grows anywhere. I can go 5 minutes north and have tons of grass next to the water, in mission bay. Especially considering that Fiesta Island is in the works to be developed into what much of it will be a BIG OL WATERFRONT PARK. I can also go 5 minutes east and have tons of grass in a big park called balboa park. There is only one spot highrises and vibrant life and urban environment exist in our county. That is downtown. Take your tree hugging antics and concentrate on fiesta island if you have a hard-on for the grass and water mixture. The Pacific Gateway project is a great idea, looks fantastic and accomodates more than the community plan blueprinted. Get over it, a park isnt going in there. So drop that horrible idea. That location is perfect for what they have designed, a step ladder type development with open space for ground level shops and such, hotels, offices, and living. Add a museum too and nice architecture and the project is a winner in my book. Im glad you are not making any decisions for this city. VERY VERY glad.
Wow - who are you talking to? And who's talking about a park? My god, chill out.
__________________
BaumbergerStudio - Architectural Illustration
www.baumbergerstudio.com/
sbaumberger no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 01:30 AM   #110
dtsd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 43
Likes (Received): 0


Yea, no doubt, who are you talking to? Iíd love to see some towers in the mix. The problem is NBC's complete disregard for the water itís right next to. What people would like to see is something more like the Vancouver pictures urban_sd posted on page 3.
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...9&postcount=56

Youíll notice virtually every waterfront picture has open green space for recreation and many also have beaches, some packed with people enjoying it no less. This is such a no-brainer. Itís such a waste of waterfront land to construct buildings right up to the water.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASupertall4SD
There is only one spot highrises and vibrant life and urban environment exist in our county. That is downtown.
Are you saying downtown should have some finite amount of land, boxed in by artificial borders, and once thatís developed it should not be permitted to grow anymore? The reality is thereís no limit on the amount of land towers can go up on. Is there any doubt downtown will grow into Barrio Logan, Golden Hill, even Bankerís Hill once the airport goes away? Do you think Vancouver and Chicago are smaller or bigger today because theyíve done a phenomenal job with creating recreational space on their waterfront?

Setting some space aside to maximize your waterfront is in no way going to limit downtown growth; to the contrary it will catalyze growth because it makes it more desirable. Iím amazed at how people have such a hard time understanding this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keg92101
Great, now it will be another 15-20 years before anything comes up again with that site....
Actually itís the Navy whoís been dragging their feet for the past 15 years as CCDC has been poking and prodding them to get moving. This is very well documented. Typical unaccountable federal bureaucracy behavior.

Last edited by dtsd; August 17th, 2006 at 01:58 AM.
dtsd no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 01:57 AM   #111
ASupertall4SD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 523
Likes (Received): 2

i just think you are disregarding the fact that this property is NOT right up to the water. It is in fact a major street and a promenade from the water. There will be a grassy promenade, walking areas, biking areas, benches all along the waterfront. If you dont believe me then consult the North Embarcadero Plan. The proof is right there. There are going to be exactly ZERO buildings along the entire waterfront right there that will have no less than a promenade with grass and trees plenty wide and a major street between them and the water. You forget that i think. From the crescent to seaport village will all be like this. Grassy park area, pathways for bikes, benches, flower gardens etc., then a street( that isnt going anywhere) then buildings. That is a large enough offset of the water in my opinion for buildings to rise.

And sbaumberger, i was talking to DTSD, who has said he wanted an unabaded open area between any building erected and the water on that location. The problem is, it will be obstructed no matter what because there is a major street there and even more grassy area with paths and such. His idea of open space along the waterfront is already gonna happen, and i just think it is a little overkill to waste a prime location on such open space when the surrounding areas even closer to the water will be chalked full of that very thing.
ASupertall4SD no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 03:18 AM   #112
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Just build the damn thing damnit.

And I'll kill if DT expands to Golden Hill.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 08:33 AM   #113
keg92101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 46
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtsd

Yea, no doubt, who are you talking to? Iíd love to see some towers in the mix. The problem is NBC's complete disregard for the water itís right next to.
Last time I checked, NBC's PL is at least 200' from the waterfront at the closest location (check google maps if you don't by it). And, when the North Embarcadero visionary plan is implemented, now that the Port has stepped to the plate, that portion of Harbor Drive will be closes to vehicular traffic, giving you a 200' wide open space promenade along the water. You see, if your vision were carried out, and the western blocks were made park land, walking along the waterfront, there would be no urban feeling, but rather, a feeling of being outside the city, looking in. The whole community plan's idea (see community plan build out and the 2 acre park that Doug has is not there) is to bring the city to the waterfront, not the city to open space and then the waterfront.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtsd
What people would like to see is something more like the Vancouver pictures urban_sd posted on page 3.

Youíll notice virtually every waterfront picture has open green space for recreation and many also have beaches, some packed with people enjoying it no less. This is such a no-brainer. Itís such a waste of waterfront land to construct buildings right up to the water.


Oh yeah, everyone take a look at the HUGE park in between all of those buildings and the bay. I think this picture is what a waterfront city is all about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtsd
Are you saying downtown should have some finite amount of land, boxed in by artificial borders, and once thatís developed it should not be permitted to grow anymore? The reality is thereís no limit on the amount of land towers can go up on. Is there any doubt downtown will grow into Barrio Logan, Golden Hill, even Bankerís Hill once the airport goes away? Do you think Vancouver and Chicago are smaller or bigger today because theyíve done a phenomenal job with creating recreational space on their waterfront?
Come on, Chicago is what it is because of the Burnham Plan, not Millenium Park. And were you at any of the CCDC Plan update meetings? If so I'm sure you remember all the Golden Hill, Logan Heights, Sherman Heights, and Barrio Logan residents claiming that Downtown is too dense and that they DONT want downtown to spread to their communities. And, we all know that NO ONE in San Diego politics has the Cojones to tell these communities that they are not pulling their weight in tax revenue and that their run down areas are now going to be opened up for redevelopment, Like Vancouver and San Francisco with SOMA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dtsd
Setting some space aside to maximize your waterfront is in no way going to limit downtown growth; to the contrary it will catalyze growth because it makes it more desirable. Iím amazed at how people have such a hard time understanding this.
Easy, very few residents who live in downtown, go to say, Embarcadero Park, Seaport Village, etc... The 2 acre park that is planned will serve the workers, visitors and residents because it is surrounded by street level retail. And I don't see how hard it is for YOU to understand that urban open space is best when surrounded by an urban environment. I would take San Francisco's Washington Square over Vancouver's grassy knolls along their bay any day of the week. Why? Because it makes you feel like you are IN A CITY! if you ask me, leave the grass land on the other side of the bay, where you can't build high rises.

Again, I think that this is a great forum where different opinions can be shared, which they are. DTSD want's waterfront parks, where as I prefer city parks like Washington Square in SF and Bryant Park in NYC.
keg92101 no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 09:49 AM   #114
ASupertall4SD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 523
Likes (Received): 2

i couldnt agree more keg. The interesting thing is, both the opinions of us two, and DTSD in reality are going to come true. THe North Embarcadero Visionary Plan calls for open space in a promonade format. Lots of open space along the waterfront with at least three very large open areas. One on that pennisula already in existence south of the midway, a new planned circular park that hugs the waterfront just north of seaport village, the half city block open space that is designed into the pacific gateway development and the park space surrounding the County Administration Building. These areas all connected by paths, more greenery, more grass and open space, benches, etc. If it is true that they are closing that area in front of the Pacific Gateway development to traffic then that is even more open space. Bottom line is DTSD, i have a feeling, is going to eventually be very happy with how the waterfront looks because it is just what he is asking for, almost exactly. He/she just may not know it. And a few hundred meters off the water will be the nice urban landscape rising up. Both of these can happen without condemning Pacific Gateway to the BRAC process. It is an amazing looking project as is, particularly the the lower rise buildings closer to the water on the site.

I think the CCDC wises up and agrees to move forward, and then the waterfront begins to transform. On a side note, i hope this same arguement doesnt arise with the lane field project. That is the exact same thing, just as far off the water, just as fantastic a site.
ASupertall4SD no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 10:47 AM   #115
chicbicyclist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 172
Likes (Received): 0

I'll take any green open spaces over the abominable paved open parking spaces any day.
chicbicyclist no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 10:55 AM   #116
ASupertall4SD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 523
Likes (Received): 2

i would too, although im not sure that is the debate. i will concede this. If Lindbergh leaves for greener pastures in Miramar, then a Nice Huge waterfront park there would be my preference. Maybe let in some water on the site and make a nice big Marina a la Dubai with mid rises, high rises and lots of park.

[IMG][/IMG]

Last edited by ASupertall4SD; August 17th, 2006 at 11:14 AM.
ASupertall4SD no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 12:38 PM   #117
chicbicyclist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 172
Likes (Received): 0

I just hope that if and when Lindbergh Filed left, that the are wouldnt turn into a Mega Midway District in Loma Portal, with all those car-centric arterial roads. I already hate Harbor Drive as it is.
chicbicyclist no está en línea  
Old August 17th, 2006, 08:10 PM   #118
eric_burress
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 27
Likes (Received): 0

If the airport ever moves, I would like to see a super-spiffy urban, pedestrian-friendly neighborhood made up primarily of mid-rises with a few nice parks, schools, and some more retail as well. Street cars linking it with downtown would also be nice.

Something possibly like:


eric_burress no está en línea  
Old August 18th, 2006, 03:44 AM   #119
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

agreed

*dreams of a crescent shaped skyline*
hngcm no está en línea  
Old August 18th, 2006, 05:12 AM   #120
dtsd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 43
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm
And I'll kill if DT expands to Golden Hill.
It will.
dtsd no está en línea  


 

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium