(Picture coming off the 163 on 6th Ave in Hillcrest, stopped at the light crossing University.)
Anyone else really disappointed in the city’s acceptance for the Denizen apartment complex? I think it really harms the character of Hillcrest and is an ugly blip looking here forever now. Also the sidewalk is so small, it makes it feel very hostile. I mean, right down the road, in the back of this shot there’s the new apartments called Rowyn. While I wish we didn’t allow for these 5-over-1 luxury apartment leeches to spring up all over the city (and county), I’d say Rowyn is more aware of its area and doesn’t detract from the neighborhood. But the Denizen is… a cold welcome onto Sixth
It seems hard to get too hung up on this one when the ugly AT&T building is just to the left out of frame...
Lmao I’m sorry this is funny. Hillcrest is great, but it’s never been particularly pretty. It is an ugly ass building tho…
I live a few blocks from here, and Denizen did a reasonable job of being nice to walk past. There's some decent greenery at street level. This, despite it being on 6th, which is not a nice street, since it's so clogged by cars. There's much more pleasant walkability on 5th, and Denizen actually ties into that kind of nicely (a tiny portion of it spans the entire width, fronting onto 5th).
As an aside, I wish Rowyn had a bit nicer/greener street frontage, and perhaps some height differences throughout. As it is it's a monstrosity that spans the entire length of the block. We'll see what happens when the trees grow. Fingers crossed!
As a further aside, there are quite a few nice apartment complexes further west, in the 3-4 floor height range, with inner courtyards and grass and trees in the front areas. Would that we'd gotten ahead of the housing crisis so that developments these days didn't need to be so incredibly precise on taking up every last square foot. Build up, not out, is my view!
And looping it alllllmost all the way back to the initial point of your reply, when we moved here one of the first things I thought about that AT&T building is that it's ripe for an amazing set of murals!
I think rowyn looks decent from street level, but yea, it still dis the stupid puzzle piece facade and lacks any ornate features
Agree with pretty much every aspect of this take
They just removed the top half of the AT&T monstrosity. I noticed all of the strange looking satellite dishes were gone yesterday
You don't realize how sad that the longlines were removed. That was a significant part of history and only a few remained as complete as Hillcrest. Hell I can't think of any still remaining that were as complete.
🤭
Weren't they taking that apart not long ago?
My first thought was that they were trying to match the aesthetic of the AT&T building and succeeded.
Both are hideous. As someone who loves beautiful architecture and relief detailing (à la balboa park), I am constantly disappointed by how ugly hillcrest is. The character is lacking. I understand it’s to enable cheaper costs for the developer, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t ugly and sad to look at.
This is a 100% fair roast LOL. The post is lamenting that it’s a copy and pasted cardboard box, not a surrounding-informed addition. I understand artistry is not high on peoples list when it comes to checking the boxes, but longterm utility of a neighborhood is directly correlated to things like walkability. Not to mention, perpetuating the idea that these types of uninspired buildings are a requirement for dense housing just further engrains your own environmental racism.
"environmental racism"?
The main strip of Hillcrest is pretty ugly for how fabulous it is
Hard to make things nice when 6th is a highway feeder
Making it 3 lanes instead of 4 (land 3 being left turn only) would help a lot.
Agreed, they should totally extend the configuration adjacent to the park northward.
Why was Pernicano’s empty for so long?
Infighting among the offspring leading to lawsuits.
Old man Pernicano left it vacant after it closed and refused to sell. Then the family infighting started after he died.
I always heard it was due to the original owner being so homophobic he closed the restaurant when he saw two guys kissing. And allegedly wouldn’t sell to developers to spite the community. This article from the voice of San Diego mentions the rumors, but suggest it’s unsubstantiated.
Prop 13 means that long time property owners have very low running costs and no real reason to sell vacant lots in high demand areas. Theyre incentivized to hold and speculate
They got very rich by holding for so long and letting the efforts of the wider community make their parcel a lot more valuable
The kind of story that makes me sympathetic to the Georgists
https://preview.redd.it/d426rl9sow9g1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=102012fb10a74120dd43c1d7c420d6231f25e712
All that money for this view is insane 😂
I’m sorry what the hell is that lol
I got more but I got chores to do today! Enjoy.
That’s either a hallway window or a fully tinted / blurred out bathroom window. Not meant to be a view window
elevator bathrooms
That's likely the interior hallway, where the doors to apartments are accessed.
It's giving SF
Yes it’s ugly and some of the residents have been calling in noise complaints on Number One which is double ugly
Moving into a business district and complaining about the businesses conducting their business is a special kind of entitled
Totally agree. I lived above the waterfront bar in little Italy (Kettner & Hawthore) for over 3 years. Never once did I think, fuck.. let me call and complain about the patio/ bar noise/music. Christ almighty...
Y I hate when people are bothered by this. Or they want to live in a quiet neighborhood but complain about the walkablility to restaurants and bars. Like what is wrong with you?
Maybe. Maybe the building has unreasonably bad noise isolation and it's intolerable living there.
Then they can buy earplugs or move? The building was just built and the rents are high, if they can afford to live there, they can afford somewhere quieter as well. Still wrong and irresponsible to call in noise complaints on a bar that’s been there 40+ years because you chose to live in the center of a business district.
"luxury" is such a nonsense word now. it basically just means "less than 25 years old" for apartment complexes.
Noise? At a gay bar? Gay noise in a gay bar in a gayborhood in a city celebrating over 50 years of Pride??? Yeah, good luck with that to those “neighbors.” Truly a fool’s errand to try and silence us queer ppl in our own backyard! Cheers!
Wow, I hope the city tells them to pound sand. That’s like moving into a Gaslamp loft above a club and bitching about noise. Hillcrest is in the running for top nightlife spot with North Park, PB, and Downtown. I hope the complainers continue to suffer for being stupid.
You don’t move along the main strip of a nightlife district if noise bothers you. I’d never want to live that close to University in Hillcrest, and I’m gay and enjoy going there. I’d be miserable living there, and I certainly wouldn’t pay a premium to do so.
city has limited control over how a building looks because what is considered attractive or not is to subjective so state law prohibits cities from having aesthetics be a roadblock to more housing
First, there’s a lack of housing and people complain.
Then housing is proposed and people complain because it’s going to take away a parking space, it’s going to change the character of the neighborhood, it should only be single family, white picket fence housing, etc
Then more housing is built and people complain because it’s more expensive than what someone paid ten years ago, it’s marketed as luxury but isn’t, it’s hideous, or, apparently, it’s…not interesting.
It’s fine. Of all the things to get upset or annoyed about, this doesn’t even register.
I mostly agree. But developers should make their buildings more beautiful.
Crown molding can be fully CNCed these days, yet we have less of it than when it took a craftsman that had completed a 5 year apprenticeship.
Or like... at least don't paint it fucking grey.
The last thing we need is new housing's looks having to get approval from some committee. Frankly, a lot of the ugliness from new apartment buildings comes from regulations intended to impose some aesthetic standards to their façades end resulting in architects relying on techniques that they know will get approval and aren't expensive.
Well said.
Unfortunately the only buildings that pencil out are the cheapest possible things to build. These buildings are particle board cabinets, plastic wood-look flooring, and EIFS / plaster on the exterior. Having some random paint color change on a blank exterior wall is about as exciting as it gets. I’m guessing those walls don’t have windows in anticipation of another building being built next door.
And yet these units are still wildly expensive to rent and it’s not like the developers are making much on these buildings. In fact, they’re probably losing money unless it gets to 100% occupancy…
Unfortunately, due to our exhaustive regulations, NIMBY’s, and high labor costs - this is as good as it gets in order to build a project out here. Any finish upgrades will be used on the interior first, and upgrading the exterior is pretty far down on the list. Even getting bigger windows is a pretty big stretch. These added features simply would not increase how much they can charge for rent because it’s already maxed out! People can’t afford anything more
Very good response- you get it.
And you know all this because...? You don't live here.
This is more or less resi development 101 anywhere. Make a nicer exterior that will get you no more rent or upgrade finishes inside that will get you more rent is basic stuff lol.
Look at my response to your other comment.
What info do you have that’s contrary? It allllll comes down to money
5 over 1 apartment buildings are the cheapest way to build high density housing at a price point that developers can handle while also not being a 30+ story building.
Single family homes are made out of cheap materials too and generally have shitty architecture. Not sure why we don't clamor about those either, but here we are
That's one of the biggest complaints I see about ADUs actually - shitty construction and awful design
Yeah, because ADUs are a stop gap measure to allow for higher density without changing the height restrictions for neighborhoods with single family homes.
We’ve overzoned America, and as a result we don’t let market forces find ways to make dense AND attractive buildings
It’s like that because the property next to it will probably be developed on the property line, so not having windows there is smart to maximize light they know will always come in. We’re also in housing shortage crisis, rather than a blank wall that can be painted later than nothing and no place for people to live in…
I always think about that when I see apartments built 4' from the property line with windows on the side. That's asking for problems down the road. Look at what happened with Exotic Gardens on El Cajon Blvd - the east facing units have big windows and had a great view to the east, and now their view is...a flat plaster wall 4' away. I'm sure the residents love that.
Housing should be built like this, with some thought towards what may be built in the future.
Also, I do think it's funny that OP pointed out Rowyn as a better approach, considering it's the same developer.
Looks like a normal ass apartment building to me. We need more of them
Looks fine.
I guess no one here realizes the code requires this face of the building to be empty so future buildings can be directly up against it.
The housing shortage is ugly. High rent is ugly. Homelessness is ugly.
Fixing these things is beautiful
Except building overpriced “luxury” homes for rich people doesn’t really fix any of those things
Regular housing for regular people used to be built more often
What do you think would happen if the people living there took their rental budget and started looking for places elsewhere in the neighborhood?
They were going to find a place to live regardless of whether this building was built or not. The only question if they do it by living here or outbidding other people for other homes.
What is "regular housing" to you? More single family homes?
It actually does fix those things that's why San Diego rents decreased this year or the first time in 15 years.
No, next question.
Yeah, we should destroy these people's homes and rebuild it only after everyone who visits Hillcrest approves of the building's aesthetic. Sounds like a better plan when we aren't meeting our housing goals.
I’m confused about the extent to which OP’s post is just “ew, look a building, how ugly”.
Like, anytime someone says “neighborhood character”, I automatically assume whatever they have to say is just some NIMBY shit, and I’ve yet to really be led astray by that.
Weird nimby post. I'm happy that there is more dense housing
Correct me if I’m wrong but this isn’t the type of housing people are vocal about. Pseudo-luxury apartments that price out most of the people in SD facing housing crises doesn’t seem like a good thing.
Yay more housing!
Perfectly soulless
The residents have souls, which is all that's important.
A lot of people pick their home because they can afford it, not because of its soul.
Building looks confused
guess you haven't been to Bellevue, Washington... that city has no charm
Lots of hillcrest is dope — I just mean these Greystar monstrosities
It looks like a prison. Also, I hate how the building that used to be City Delicatessen is no longer colorful.
I think the best way to make it not look so ugly is to double its height
You’re comparing an affordable housing project to a 5 star luxury apartment cladded in marble panels….
Den Izen
Not to mention that the entire block smells like dog urine now.
That picture looked a lot better in the days when the fruits and veggies on that corner building were all painted in color.
Far from the worst I’ve seen in San Diego tbh
Build baby build
Said luxury apartment has cheaper rent than your "neighborhood character affordable single family home". It also saves acres of land compared to if we let every resident pretend they're a medieval feudal lord on a yard (actually modern single family homes are worse from an economic perspective because people grew crops in their yard in the old feudal days), which allows us to preserve "green space", water, and nature.
I love tall buildings in Hillcrest! Helping to reduce gentrification and keep the important things in Hillcrest - the people.
what a thing to cry about
oh thank you creepy newspaper, i see now! oh i sure am real silly for ever spilling tears over a building. does it matter if architecture is an interest of mine? does it matter if im trained in city planning? definitely should NOT, my bad. why should my interests + studies shape my perspective + opinions? next time just scroll by the post that doesn’t peak your interests.
*pique
*pique
I'm just kidding dude.
I’m just *pique-ing dude!
Just keep truckin’ on!
I’m just Peking duck. Quack.
Why not apply to be a city planner? You can always propose more parking lots.
That’s our city now. Ugly complexes popping up randomly anywhere there’s money to be made. City planning is out.
It's ugly but that's part of the point of living in a city. If you want a lot of nature, there's always Ramona...
There’s lots of ways to make cities practical and attractive. It just takes consistent zoning over the years. And the political will. Just looked online at a cute craftsman bungalow near bird park. 1000 square feet, nice yard. Then, saw the 6 story monstrosity condo built almost on the property line. F that. Neighborhood ruined.
We have had strict zoning since forever, and it's how we got to this situation. NIMBYs will say anything that isn't a SFH is "ugly" and should be torn down for a parking lot. If you look at pre-2020 Tokyo, it's ugly as sin, but the housing situation there (was) better.
Strict my ass. I grew up in normal heights, modest but homey. Now look at it. ADU and dingbat next to craftsman turning a middle class neighborhood into mixed junk 40 years ago and getting worse by the year. No wonder we’re all moving to the north county where they actually plan growth.
Ah yeah, we don't have strict zoning, makes sense. That's why there's no such thing as commercial, residential (SFH especially) zoning and San Diego County looks like Tokyo, Sure.
You think North County is planning anything? Have you been to Vista in the last five years? Give me a fucking break lmao
Move to Lakeside, seems to be more your style. It's fine if you want to live like a cattle farmer, nothing wrong with that. But there's downsides to living in a city that people want to live in.
Folks like you don’t want to join this city. You want to exploit and destroy it.
I was raised here, but sure, go on champ.
Anyway, what's your proposal for the housing crisis? Do you have another dimension in your pocket where we can source infinite land?
No? Then tough shit, we have to start building up. If you don't have a solution, don't reply.
Life changes gramps. It's not 1934 anymore.
San Diego is absolutely not a city…. It’s a town.
Yea. If you live in that steaming pile called NYC, we are a town of only 1.5m. You know us as Mayberry. Military and college students, surfers and dopers. That’s us. To you.
Hospital vibes
Not only is it kind of drab as buildings go, who the fuck wants to be a resident in a place called "Denizen?"
Makes it sound like a dungeon, and not either of the fun kinds.
Why? Denizen means an inhabitant or resident. Makes it sound like ... a place to live.
Ah yes, the denizens of San Diego. The denizens of the United States.
Such common usage, as opposed to "the dungeon's denizens." Widely known word "denizens," good word, great word some might even say the best for telling someone "I'm a denizen here!"
Sure, it’s ugly. I don’t care. All new housing is good housing. Build more ugly housing.
It doesn’t end there. Gets better down the road
Every apartment block looks like an ugly external hard drive. The last architectural design style that was worth a damn was Art Deco.
Can you name three art deco buildings in San Diego?
Nah, the heyday of that movement was 1920s New York.
This is me bitching that I simply don't vibe with modern, mainstream aesthetics. I'm not really trying to make any grand statements beyond "I wish buildings looked prettier like they did in the past."
This is all of america now. They in every town and city.
All of the new apartment building are hideous with the exception of a few smaller “boutique type” ones.
The red one on university with the urinals facing the street is a winner SMH
Is gay
The view in this photo was designed and built that way because because they anticipate future development that would be built up around it and shielding it from view.
On top of that, when the new development arrives there are many code and privacy issues that would arise if it were fully open and developed.
It's not pretty but it's 100% thinking about the current and future developments.
Those ugly complexes are going up all over San Diego. So disappointing.
Get over it.
Not being able to afford rent in the city I grew up in is ugly
Millennial gray: now on the outside!
Complaining about a building’s look based on a wall built on a property line is pretty stupid. Of course they’re not going to place windows or other architectural elements on that wall. It will just be covered up when the neighboring property goes vertical.
You seem unfamiliar with how development in urban neighborhoods works.
I complain about this building every time I see it. And I live in the neighborhood so I see it a lot lol.
At least paint it some interesting colors. Hillcrest is not a gray neighborhood.
I love that they are building more apartments. I just wish they didn’t all have to be “luxury”.
I toured the new 8th and U building and the prices are INSANE for how little space is in each unit.
There is an actual affordable housing building by the jack in the box now and I like how it looks but the income caps coupled with the rent is a weirdly large percentage of what a person who could rent there makes. Plus it has zero parking.
Also, I wish these places had units for sale. Everything is rent only.
San Diego architecture hasn’t been good since the last world war. Change my mind.
are there any infill apartments in hillcrest with architecture you like?
Cool, where’s the parking???
Ok NIMBY
I agree the lack of windows on the north/south sides of Denizen is really unfortunate. Creates a giant mass that just looms over the rest of the neighborhood. But the designated public sidewalk is really narrow on Sixth to begin with—I believe on that side Denizen actually set their building back several feet farther than they're legally obligated to. IMO the main problems with Hillcrest sidewalks are the lack of shade and the ugly utilities boxes blocking the sidewalk every hundred feet.
It’s a nuisance for planners but in think there ought to be building codes that enforce a certain style of architecture consistent to either San Diego or that particular neighborhood. San Luis Obispo has a code similar to it. I think Santa Barbara does too. It feels other worldly sometimes but it’s very nice to see classic looking buildings in a very noisy space.
Looks like a commie block. Would be significantly improved with a full length mural on the windowless side. Popular thing to do in Ukraine and some other post communist countries.
Yeah what an eye sore
People will complain about this but not a parking garage..
Sure it doesn't look pretty but the real problem is the cost of these units are actually insane, prices start at 2.5k for a studio and go up to over 4k for a 2bd with a massive amount of fees you pay with the rent for everything and the total cost to move into this place ranges from 5-10k. This is defiantly not helping the housing situation here and only making it worse, this is not just a local problem though
It’s awful and it mimics a lot of the new high rise apt buildings in north park. So disappointing, these buildings are such cynical cash grabs with no regard for architectural beauty.
You’re in a housing crisis where municipalities couldn’t figure out how to build appropriately. Congrats on reaping the many decades of previous leadership and a financial crisis that exacerbated the issue.
But also yeah this is an opportunity to plan and build a city that doesn’t suck and it’s congruent architecture.
The irony is that people want to live in hillcrest because of the cool businesses, local culture, and beautiful historic architecture. Then they knock that stuff down (not in denizen’s case exactly, but many others) and build hideous buildingslop with no local culture. Sort of a tragedy of the commons style situation among developers.
I’m not a nimby at all but I wish they’d build more mindfully and democratically, and especially less “luxury” bullshit like these.
If you think anesthetics trump building homes for people, you are a NIMBY.
I am not saying looks should trump building homes. First, it’s possible to build more homes and for them not to be ugly. Second, my interest is in their democratic creation—people should (1) have a say in what gets built in their city (rather than being subject to developers’ whims), and (2) housing should be affordable, not “luxury” in hopes it will trickle down. I’m afraid you have fallen victim to developer propaganda!
City is just allowing everything to be slapped up. Once again we'll be used as an example of what not to do in planning classes. Very sad.
I wish this were true and if it were, our housing crisis would soon be over
It’s extremely difficult to deny housing in California. Cities can only comment on objective aspects of housing projects. Developers can build whatever they want as long as they abide by local development standards.
Is that a joke? Lol. California cities have some of the most restrictive zoning laws in the country.
I was downvoted by NIMBYs for saying the same people. Is there some amazing meth getting passed around? Where the fuck are these "there's no zoning" claims coming from?
Not for housing related projects with affordable units. Especially now that all infill housing developments are exempt from CEQA.
DENIZEN was completed long before the CEQA changes
Ah okay, didn’t know that. Still, I think it’s difficult for a city to deny a housing project that is abiding by development standards. The project is more likely to be killed by market conditions.
Difficult to deny housing? I disagree, all the NIMBY’s have to do is demand a traffic study. Then when one is produced a year later, they can latch on to any little thing in it to get a project shut down
That’s why it’s so expensive to build out here. Six figures get spent on planning and waiting a year or three for project approvals and it gets shut down. Now the developer is in the hole and they have nothing
This is why we end up with these ugly buildings. All the money has been stripped out of the project. It is the cheapest thing we couple possibly build. And once complete, the rents are so high that not many people can afford to live there. And the developers might not even be making money on it unless it’s fully leased out
Something something capitalism, we’ve peaked and are heading downhill fast
Interesting that someone who doesn't even live in my hood, let alone my backyard, can place blame. Sorry you're wrong.
Not sure what your comment means. I lived in SD for 5 years and moved a little north 4 years ago. I’m an architect and still work on projects in San Diego. I couldn’t be any more in the loop about how it all goes
Yes, Hillcrest has character and it should be maintained instead of these McBuildings being constructed supposedly to address housing but really for profit and to jack up the cost of living for everyone without taking into account things like parking and quality of life - a 2br 2ba cost over 4,000 monthly in that ugly thing :(