Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
The problem with San Diego's historic neighborhoods
Can you identify a single housing project that was prevented because of a historic district. Sounds like another developer talking point to me. I realize you might self identify as a YIMBY, but that's the same as being a developer lobbyist. There's nothing wrong with developers and their paid and unpaid lobbyists, but there is something wrong with not acknowledging your interests in the dialog. Historic districts provide a framework for development and a tool to make for meaningful cities. If you don't care what a city you live in looks and feels like why do you want to live in a city as nice as San Diego?— November 18, 2018 7:48 p.m.
The problem with San Diego's historic neighborhoods
You are making stuff up. My sense is both the general public and the property owners benefit from and care about the Gaslamp Historic District, and the Old Town Historic District. Perhaps right wing extremists like you protested those with the same claims. And if you bothered to read about what historic districts are you would realize they don't prevent development, they guide it. With the result being interesting and meaning neighborhoods that have both new and old housing. And your made up claim it lowers property values and tax revenue is nonsense. I can see the value of a reasoned argument about historic districts, but facts, not nonsense, matter in that discussion.— November 18, 2018 9:01 a.m.
The problem with San Diego's historic neighborhoods
Really? So tearing down old buildings will fix corporate greed and deception that has brought us to where we find our selves with the environmental crisis we are in? And also fix the housing pricing crisis, which we are in substantially by the related concentration of wealth and therefore control of real estate prices, both for rental and sales. Sounds like you are one of YIMBY types who are espousing simplistic right wing libertarian ideas in service of corporate developers and their lobbyists. Sadly these simplistic binary notions are not going to solve those problems, anymore than building a wall on the border is going to address global issues of inequality. Sadly, just like discussions of a border wall, your misguided ideas are both a diversion and destructive of both communities and meaningful, truly democratic discourse. Which is the only shot we have to cure the issues you articulate. If we are smart we can preserve our past, build housing and address environment issues. If we are stupid we can let corporations trick us into doing their PR work for them...— November 17, 2018 10:38 p.m.
The problem with San Diego's historic neighborhoods
First, this article seems to be more of a Nextdoor Golden Hill rant than journalism. Second, historical preservation matters. And its complicated. But all great cities grapple with it because they realize if you find a way to meaningfully respect and preserve key aspects of your past you have a shot at preserving your soul.— November 15, 2018 9:17 p.m.
Democrat Peters goes after McMillin
Maybe its a good sign that Scott Peters, as part of his potential mayoral run, has opened up a dialog about the corrupt and long relationship between the City government and developers. Perhaps his consultants and his gut tells him this is something he can use as part of his campaign. As we know, the cozy relationship between developers and our "leaders" has been equal opportunity corruption, involving both Republicans and Democrats. So maybe he realizes this could give him an edge over other potential Democratic candidates. Is it too much to imagine a City government that is focused on governing for the residents instead of playing monopoly with the powerful.— November 14, 2018 6:14 p.m.
DMV building doesn't fit the neighborhood
An issue the DMV representatives brought up is the complication of a public/private partnership in development. They listed issues such as financing difficulties and that DMV would have been a tenant of the developer. My opinion is that given all the new incentives in this city for developers we are about to see many new housing units being built (or opportunities of privately held land), and for that and many other reasons I think this site should remain a publicly owned site and project that will benefit the community in perpetuity. A fully civically owned site of this scale, in this location, is worth being treated with care. The leaders in the city tend to give away a lot to developers whenever they can, so I would assume the community would be the big loser in a public/private development. Perhaps Todd Gloria can use this situation to help restore some of the confidence the Uptown Community lost in him when he orchestrated, despite much opposition, the convoluted sale of the Truax House property. There are lingering negative aftermaths and general bad taste from that situation: the loss of public benefit opportunity, substantial frustration, and ongoing less than transparent communication. The permanent impacts and ramifications on the Truax property, Olive Street Park and the Aids memorial, are still bumping their way through Uptown. The DMV site could be over 2 acres of underground parking, both for the DMV office and the community. And at street level the DMV office (and associated driving area for tests) and a public park/plaza. The park/plaza could be part of the proposed Normal Street linear park, as well as part of the farmers market on weekends. This could be much like what was done at the County Building, which is a huge success on many levels. Hillcrest could finally get a central gathering area and permanent public parking. And the DMV could build and own a nice new office. A huge win for all (except a private developer who could find a way to take advantage of the situation). Also, if the DMV would simply start texting people instead of using a loud public address system people who want to wait outside for their appointment could go to the park/plaza to wait. As I see it, this isn't a potential failure of the DMV, but instead it will be either a failure or success of our elected officials.— September 7, 2018 11:29 a.m.
Robert Venturi's columns tucked behind La Jolla bungalow
Sure, while I don't know about the design process for the Venturi/Brown addition, I am willing to believe there is a cynical read on what happened. My experience of both architects, having seen them speak about their work, is that they are/were not cynical, and had good ideas, but just unable to get their ideas into the actual built buildings. Probably not that atypical, but kinda weird when the architects are famous. Regarding the money aspect of both this institution and the entire art world, that is a hugely interesting huge issue. I suppose the horror show that is the art world is worth putting up with for good art. But geez........— August 29, 2018 5:32 p.m.
Robert Venturi's columns tucked behind La Jolla bungalow
I think the timing of this is partly why its being discussed. Post Modern architecture is starting to be looked at through the lens of history at this time, which is a great thing. It will be interesting to see if Horton Plaza gets the same courtesy as Venturi's columns. In many ways it is a more significant and important example of Post Modern architecture. It is sadly ironic that its current fate is to be turned into bland modernist revival architecture, which seems to be what everything getting built now has to look like.— August 29, 2018 8:34 a.m.
Robert Venturi's columns tucked behind La Jolla bungalow
I recall that the Venturi addition/modification of the MCA building was not particularly well received when it was first completed. I also recall there was resistance to removing the large sycamore trees that were in the way of Venturi's vision. (The trees provided a friendly and welcoming aspect to the earlier version of the museum.) There was confusion in how to both enter the museum as designed by Venturi, and where to go once you got in. All of the theoretical discussion about the pedestrian/community experience associated with the Venturi addition seems to be just that, theory. Also, its aggressive aesthetics seemed to dominate the art put inside the lobby. And the cartoon-like columns in question sort of made fun (in every sense of the word) of the Gill facade. I'm not sure it ended up really working that well in reality. But it is serious and thoughtful architecture, maybe just not successful. Or at least that is how it was discussed when it was first complete. I know the Seattle Art Museum designed by Venturi's firm (at roughly the same time) had similar problems and a similar cool response from both the public and architectural critics. (and was destined to a similar fate of semi preservation). In a way these projects ended the momentum for the architectural firm. The facade of the Irving Gill building is a re-creation from the time of the Venturi remodel. It had been obliterated in a previous remodel. I heard that at the same time they were recreating the Gill facade they destroyed some original interior bits of the Gill house that were intact. Preserving architecture is difficult. In a sense its the most ephemeral art form, as land value tends to outweigh preservation. I don't know if the flawed Venturi addition to the site worth preserving in its full. In a sense it mars the Gill house facade. But Venturi matters in architectural history. But enough to justify the various aesthetic and other costs of preserving it? I'm not sure there are any bad guys or heros in this story. The powers that be didn't end up with a masterpiece with the Venturi addition. My sense is they are not aiming for a masterpiece with the upcoming one. I think its highly possible they had one with the Gill house. But it was in the way of becoming a big museum. Seems to me its all some version of architectural ephemera at the service of all the big egos that create and support art museums.— August 28, 2018 9:18 p.m.
How high can Bankers Hill go?
JustWondering, your comment is somewhat vague, but I assume you realize the Bankers Hill community has been very supportive of new buildings, and essentially came to a compromised agreement with the City and developers about height already. St Paul's is not only asking to disregard that agreement regarding height, but is also asking to go beyond setbacks that are in place to respect Balboa Park. So essentially the community has further compromised by accepting the noticeable encroachment into the setbacks. St Paul's could easily ask for increased density and a larger building envelope by going beyond setbacks and respect the sacred height limit next to Balboa Park, and I think the divine compromise you refer to would be achieved. I suppose I agree with you that there is a divine aspect to compromise, but I feel an even more sacred quality is to respect your community (both the residents, future residents, and the buildings that help define the quality of life now and in the future). St Paul's is NOT respecting its community.— July 19, 2018 11:33 a.m.