San Diego Development News

[7t]

WTF is up with City Hall allowing these crappy projects to be build?
They're cheap and tasteless, the only thing they might fullfill is functionality and open space demand. It's really depressing when you compare them with LA and San Fran projects.
These developers must be some cheap bastards that dont wanna spend an extra dime on aesthetics of the building and hire mediocre architects to do the job.

[SDfan]

Thanks for the SSP updates.
Did anyone see this by the way?

Gaylord, port talks on hotel to restart
Local labor groups hit the picket line

By David Washburn
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

August 8, 2007

Gaylord Entertainment has resumed negotiations with Chula Vista and San Diego Unified Port District officials on a $1 billion resort hotel and convention center on the Chula Vista bayfront, despite its inability to come to terms with local unions.

Port commissioners yesterday, responding to a letter Gaylord sent Thursday, agreed in closed session to continue negotiations with the Tennessee-based company. The port action came after a month-long impasse while Gaylord battled with union leaders.

On July 6, Gaylord abruptly walked away from a deal that had been two years in the making, citing unreasonable demands by the unions. Labor leaders countered by saying Gaylord could not be trusted to hire local workers on the project, and a week ago announced they no longer were negotiating with the company.

Gaylord, citing strong support from the community, has come back to the negotiating table anyway.

“As a result of the overwhelming show of community support for Gaylord's inclusion within the Chula Vista Bayfront Project, Gaylord hereby requests to continue discussions,” Gaylord Senior Vice President Bennett Westbrook wrote in a letter to port President Bruce Hollingsworth.

Westbrook also has had discussions in recent days with Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox, who said she was thrilled by the response from the community.

“I'm pleased that (Gaylord) talked to me on Friday,” Cox said. “They got the message loud and clear from labor that they won't talk to them. I hope they got the other half, which is, 'I will.' ”

Labor demonstrated that it will continue to publicly oppose Gaylord at every opportunity. Yesterday, union members picketed outside the port building, and Electrical Workers Union spokeswoman Jennifer Badgley read a statement to port commissioners before they went into closed session.

“I think their definition of community is different from mine,” Badgley said later. “The only community I've seen around Gaylord is chamber of commerce types and developer front groups.”

The unions want Gaylord to agree to a “project labor agreement,” which is a contract between the developer and unions saying the project will be built by union workers.

These agreements are common in the construction world, but not universal. Gaylord has avoided them in other hotel and convention center projects it has built in Texas and Florida, and one that it is building in Maryland.

Gaylord's last proposal offered a “modified” project labor agreement that would give union contractors first dibs to bid on jobs, and preference to local workers, but not require the company to use only union contractors and local labor.
Local officials have not put a timetable on the renewed talks with Gaylord, but Cox and port commissioner Mike Najera, who represents Chula Vista, said they were “moving along” before being derailed by the labor issues.

“This is a positive step, but we still have a lot of work to do to bring this to fruition,” Najera said.

Central to the negotiations is the completion of the environmental impact report for the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan, which has been in the works for years, and agreements on a lease for port-owned land and financing arrangements.

So far, officials have outlined a $308 million public subsidy for the project, probably paid through bonds and revenue generated by the development.

Officials say the project has the potential to increase revenue for Chula Vista by 10 percent; add 3,000 new, permanent jobs; and serve as a springboard for other commercial and residential developments.

[eric_burress]

I like the NBC buildings and while the Irvine tower is far from being "signature," what does anyone expect? It's impossible to do "signature" with a 500ft height limit.

[derek5]

I'm glad the Gaylord project is being talked about again.

[Karltj]

Originally Posted by derek5

I'm glad the Gaylord project is being talked about again.

Me too, hopefully they'll come up with a reasonable solution that will work for both Gaylord and the Union workers.

[mongozx]

Someone posted some nice pics of our downtown here in SSP:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=136277

Originally Posted by ALKUN

When is the Navy Broadway Complex going to be builted ?

Navy Broadway Complex is a sure thing. The issue here is that the architecture is considered less than stellar for that prominent location right by the waterfront. I personally think it's hideous and I could've done better.

[SDfan]

Thanks for the photo link mongo.


Question for everyone: What do you think the chances of SD getting a new city hall/civic center are?

Im glad sanders is pushing the idea, but I don't know how much of a reality it is, any opinions?

[7t]

I think the current building looks fine

[SDfan]

The picture is a no show.

And if its the county/city admin building on the bayfront, you are correct, it is fine.
If its the civic center-city hall in the columbia/core district...we have different ideas of what looks good.

[7t]

Slight confusion
Civic Center does looks hideous, i live up in 4th ave so i pass by there daily. Deffinitely agree with you, a new building is needed.

[passion4architecture]

I just had a good look at the Navy/Broadway Complex design.... in short IT'S ABSOLUTELY UNINSPIRING!!! IMO, w/ a design like that it WILL NOT give SD the skyline boost it rightfully deserves!!! It's a GEM of a WATERFRONT LOCATION, I hope the design is not FINAL, and w/ be re-designed!! It's not really the height, but the design can be so much more unique, distinctive and... well... have the "signature" qualities to stand out. Apparently the Developers haven't heard of "Deconstructivism" style of Architecture... or are simply playing it safe. And I guess they've haven't considered names like Calatravas, Ando, Rogers, Ito, Nouvel, Koolhas, Hadid or Rashid... either! The SF Tower is a good example. A quick look at what's coming up in London, Barcelona, Dubai, Beijing, Rotterdam, Singapore... and even Buenos Aires.. is good idea for design reference. The beautiful San Diego by the Bay deserves better!! Probably Northern America's largest Urban Redevelopment of its size, I'd think. So make the Waterfront Proud, and give SD a Signature Edifice/Complex it can call its own. ciao tutti, Dian

[eric_burress]

Generally speaking, SD couldn't do "signature" even if it wanted to because of its height limit. Even SF's gorgeous Transbay tower would look like a turd when shrunken down to <500ft.

I happen to like the NBC buildings a lot though and think they're about as good as can be expected under the circumstances. Plus, they will be much more timeless than some of that Calatravas garbage.

[SDfan]

I actually have to disagree with you eric. I believe SD can have a signature tower with the height limit, a good example being the lipstick building in New York. Its 435ft tall and considered an icon.

[SDfan]

I have some updates from SSP (I really need an account there).

These first four images have been distorted and the buildings are actually taller then they appear. I think the website where they are from squated them to fit there page. But anyways,

grigio (mondrian)


707 lofts


6th&palm (Bankers Hill)


Monaco


and heres a picture of Monaco from sd_urban who took this at the downtown info center


I think that the this building has a lot of potential. Too bad the styrofoam doesn't show the balconies that will be crawling up and down this structure.

[7t]

Originally Posted by SDfan

I actually have to disagree with you eric. I believe SD can have a signature tower with the height limit

Especcially if you build it near the bay, not amidst other tall buildings of downtown.
The tower has to be visible from a 180% angle.

[mongozx]

Monaco looks good! BUILD the mutha f^%$er!!!

Here's a Sunday article from the UT:

Condo growth slowing down

Construction costs, stricter lending rules blamed; some projects sold, others are redesigned
By Jeanette Steele

The ugly side of San Diego's condominium downturn is on display along Fifth Avenue.

The bones of what was supposed to be Atmosphere, nearly 80 “luxury live/work units for a life well-designed,” sit open to public view. Naked steel rods and yawning holes are in the earth. The wood and chain-link fence around the site looks like it has been pried open in a couple of places.

Atmosphere is one of two downtown San Diego condo projects that started then stalled. The developer of Triangle, at 14th Street and Imperial Avenue, demolished an old warehouse and then stopped. It's a parking lot now.

The rest of the tale is told in the quarterly status log of Centre City Development Corp., which oversees downtown redevelopment. Five condo projects with development permits are up for sale or recently sold. Four more in the development pipeline are being redesigned; at least one of those is changing to a hotel. The downtown agency finally closed the file on another condo proposal after the builder stopped calling or submitting documents.

It's a whiplash change of pace for the once white-hot downtown residential market. A year ago, giant construction cranes were mostly there to build condos. Many cranes that remain will be diverted to different kinds of projects – increasingly, hotels.

Downtown residents give this trend mixed reviews.

The site of what was supposed to be almost 80 "luxury live/work units for a life well-designed" at Fifth Avenue between Beech and Ash streets.
George Tybor would much rather see a new condo going up in his Marina district neighborhood than a site with nothing happening.

“As lots stay empty, they become homes for the homeless and a potential for increased crime,” Tybor said.

Joyce Summer, a Cortez Hill resident, said her worst fear is towers left halfway finished.

On the other hand, Gary Smith of the Downtown Residents Group said a slowdown gives the city time to catch up.

Downtown San Diego had 17,000 residents in 2000. The roughly 30,000 residents living downtown today still are waiting for parks and other public amenities that most city neighborhoods have.

“This gives us a little breathing space,” Smith said.

The buzz these days is about hotels, with six major hospitality ventures being proposed along the waterfront. Offices also have shown some spark: The Irvine Co. is getting permits for a 34-story office tower and Manchester Development's plan for four office buildings was just approved.

Downtown condominium builders appear to be in a holding pattern.


One factor is banks are getting stricter on lending money; they want developers to put more of their own cash into condo projects, now that the real estate boom is over.
Another reason for the condo slowdown is skyrocketing construction prices, which have made new housing projects look less profitable.

San Diego's position as one of the top five travel destinations in the nation makes the city a hot market for hotels, according to the San Diego Convention & Visitors Bureau.

Downtown hotels are running about 75 percent full, and the average room price is $182.73 a night, up 6 percent from last year. The convention center is basically booked solid, officials say.

“All that adds up to a very healthy hotel market and one of the strongest in the country,” said David Peckinpaugh, visitors bureau president.

Some residential builders say they are waiting until the current glut of new condos is sold out. They hope to position themselves to be first with new units when the market, in theory, swings upward again.

“Sometime this fall or early next winter, you're going to see several projects start,” said Sherm Harmer, chairman of the Downtown Residential Marketing Alliance, a developer group.

Not everyone thinks the condo market will spring back quite so fast.

San Diego real estate economist Gary London said the downtown skyline won't see many new residential towers for at least four years.

“There is a pipeline of 9,000 units of projects that are planned after this year – most of which won't be built,” London said.

The good news for developers – but not for bargain-hunting consumers – is that prices on new condo units, while no longer meteoric, have not taken a steep dive.

In the second quarter of this year, the median new home price in the downtown ZIP code was $411,500, according to DataQuick Information Services. In 2006, that figure was $437,000; in 2005, it was $408,750; and in 2004 it was $439,000. Geography is playing a role in a developer's degree of bullishness.

Bosa Development Corp. owns five parcels fairly close to North Embarcadero. Developer Nat Bosa intends to break ground next year on a condo tower at Kettner Boulevard and Ash Street, a spokesman said.

Another Bosa project called Bayside, at Pacific Highway and Ash Street, is under construction and completion is expected in 2009. Luxury units in that building began selling in February. The starting price was $750,000.

“When you are building higher-end units on 'A' locations, that buyer is less apt to be concerned about . . . short-term ramifications of prices dropping 5 percent, 6 percent,” said Bosa sales and marketing director Dennis Serraglio. “They know that, long term, great locations in a great city are irreplaceable.”

It's another story in the East Village. Intracorp said its Triangle condo project was a little premature.

“It's in an area that will do better with a little time,” said company President William Nichols.

The leader of the pack in condo redesign is probably the Elle, once proposed as a 173-unit housing project on A Street in Little Italy.

The Elle is now Columbia Tower, a 364-room hotel proposed by a new owner. The hotel will include 63 condo units.

Urban Housing Partners, Harmer's company, recently changed the land-use designation for its Library Tower project, once envisioned as 174 condos in a slender tower at Park Boulevard and K Street.

Harmer said his company is considering a boutique hotel or condo-hotel combination at the site, which is close to a huge Marriott convention hotel proposal.

Back at the Atmosphere site on Fifth, some downtown dwellers have complained that the stalled project's leftovers are unsightly and unsafe.

The downtown redevelopment agency forwarded those objections to the city's code enforcement unit, but an enforcement officer who checked it out said no city regulations have been violated.

The architect for the “live/work units” said the delay is in part caused by the death of the original developer. The site has gone through four owners since then, said David Hawkins of the Hawkins Hawkins Anderson firm.

The current one – who purchased the land in February, according to county records – plans to move ahead this month or next, Hawkins said. The project is still envisioned as condos.

[eric_burress]

Originally Posted by SDfan

I actually have to disagree with you eric. I believe SD can have a signature tower with the height limit, a good example being the lipstick building in New York. Its 435ft tall and considered an icon.

Maybe you're right, but I have never ever seen or heard of that building before you posted it, which kinda illustrates my point!! hahahaha


Granted, the fact that it's in NYC and hidden behind a sea of bigger and/or better buildings doesn't help its signature status...and it probably would stand out better if it were in another, smaller city.

[SDfan]

Originally Posted by eric_burress

Maybe you're right, but I have never ever seen or heard of that building before you posted it, which kinda illustrates my point!! hahahaha


Granted, the fact that it's in NYC and hidden behind a sea of bigger and/or better buildings doesn't help its signature status...and it probably would stand out better if it were in another, smaller city.

It is located in a very tall city, so it is hidden. But believe me, if this structure was in our city, or any city near our size it would be an icon (which it is in New York from what I've read. I guess you'd kind of have to pay attention to other structures in that city other then their tallests). I still don't think a structure needs to be over 500ft to be considered signature. It just needs to have the right design and location.

[eric_burress]

Originally Posted by mongozx

Bosa Development Corp. owns five parcels fairly close to North Embarcadero. Developer Nat Bosa intends to break ground next year on a condo tower at Kettner Boulevard and Ash Street, a spokesman said.

Spoonman on SSP posted these renderings of the GORGEOUS Bosa tower.

[mongozx]

How is it gorgeous? It looks typical Bosa to me. Not really a bad thing nor good.