
Battle over possibility of taller buildings near San Jose International Airport - Tempest1981
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/02/09/battle-brewing-over-possibility-of-taller-buildings-near-san-jose-international-airport/
======
CaliforniaKarl
The title is correct, but it's worth noting that the article is only talking
about the space South-East of SJC (the airport). There are already some tall
buildings to the E-NE of the airport, in the triangle bordered by SR 87, SR
101, and Interstate 880. See the area map at [0].

The other place to look would be to the W-SW of the airport, in the already-
mostly-industrial area bordered by the Caltrain tracks, the San Thomas
Expressway, and either SR 101 or the single train track that runs near De La
Cruz Blvd.. The only problem is, that's no San Jose, that's Santa Clara (see
[1]), and since "all politics is local", that doesn't count.

The area SW of the airport that is in San Jose is the empty-looking strip
between Coleman Ave and the Caltrain tracks. A chunk of that has construction
in progress, another chunk is Avaya Stadium and associated parking, and I
think the rest is reserved for a future BART terminus and associated stabling
sidings (similar to what BART has at Millbrae).

On the other hand, though… maybe that could still be used for development? It
would be expensive, since any developer would have to maintain an empty shell
on ground level, but it may be doable.

[0]:
[https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3616791,-121.9254423,4047m/d...](https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3616791,-121.9254423,4047m/data=!3m1!1e3)

[1]:
[https://www.sccgov.org/sites/dpd/DocsForms/Documents/SCC_Bou...](https://www.sccgov.org/sites/dpd/DocsForms/Documents/SCC_BoundariesMap.pdf)

~~~
masonic

      SR 101
    

US 101

------
bdamm
SJC is an outstanding airport. It's very convenient, easy to access, nice and
close to the downtown core that it serves. It would be a shame to lose this
gem of an asset.

There are policy and technology options to work around the tightness of the
city and the airport. This is a city that needs its airport. It's a rare asset
to have such a versatile and productive airport so embedded.

~~~
Johnny555
_It 's very convenient, easy to access, nice and close to the downtown core
that it serves_

That's why it will ultimately be replaced -- it's _too_ close and is limiting
growth of of that same downtown core.

~~~
volkl48
Doesn't seem to have hurt Boston much even with Logan imposing strict height
restrictions over large sections of the city.

I will also point out that if you develop in a properly dense, urban fashion,
you can create a large amount of space with relatively low-rise buildings.

I am skeptical of the premise that the airport is limiting downtown
development when I can see huge swaths of land devoted to asphalt parking lots
and single-story buildings at present. You could redevelop/build new square
footage for decades just on that.

~~~
Johnny555
Because of the orientation of Logan's runways, the main downtown isn't
included in the most restrictive airspace:

[http://www.massport.com/media/1545/boston-logan-airspace-
map...](http://www.massport.com/media/1545/boston-logan-airspace-map.pdf)

San Jose airport's runways are aimed right at San Jose's core downtown area
(near Diridon station) where all of this new development is taking place.

[http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8294](http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8294)

~~~
bdamm
The airspace restriction is on the order of 200-300' where they want to build
(near Diridon station), which is plenty for 10+ story buildings. That's still
a 5-6x increase in density, maybe more.

------
mlinksva
I wonder if long term plan ought be to shut down and redevelop SJC. Has this
been studied? I know that SAN relocation is periodically studied but not
gotten far (too bad, I'd like San Diego better without the low flying planes).
SJC is closer to downtown and there are existing alternatives (SFO and OAK) so
would seem to be a more attractive candidate.

~~~
United857
IMO, they should look at commercializing NUQ (Moffett Field) in Mountain View
and make it the new SJC. It would be a great location since it's not
surrounded by a city as with the current SJC.

One downside though would be it would add to the already crazy traffic in the
101-237 corridor.

~~~
sizzzzlerz
I think that the residents of Sunnyvale, Mountain View, and Palo Alto might
have a few issues with that.

~~~
chrisco255
Personally, I hope Silicon Valley maintains its backward nimby-ism so the rest
of the country can benefit from some of the proliferation of tech companies.

~~~
twtw
I would happily take a deal where all the advertising tech companies leave,
and only the hardware companies remain (remember why it was originally called
_silicon_ valley, not adtech/web/social/... valley).

~~~
jonny_eh
I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite happened first.

------
everdev
I used to work on the top floor of River Park Towers, right in the fight path
of the SJC approach and next to Adobe HQ.

It felt like planes were barely passing over the roof until I made the
approach in the air and felt like it must have been several hundred feet of
separation.

Still closer to a building than any other approach I can recall, but never
felt dangerous.

It certainly does reduce the margin for error though.

~~~
0max
Sounds like what landing at Hong Kong's old Kai Tak Airport back when it was
still in operation. You could see into people's homes from your window when
landing there.

------
mathattack
SJC is much easier access than SFO and much more reliable. Better to expand
it.

------
CaliforniaKarl
[https://outline.com/zrqgEu](https://outline.com/zrqgEu)

------
crushcrashcrush
Simple - you can only approach SJC airport from the north, not the south.

SJC, while super convenient (I live in the South Bay) isn't a premier airport
and will never be. Half of it is old and needs remodeling.

We need housing and density so much more than we need more flights out of SJC.

~~~
CaliforniaKarl
I'm curious, which part needs remodeling? I live on the peninsula, and SJC is
my preferred airport. I go through there at least once a year, and it's never
felt particularly run-down to me.

~~~
vkou
I've never flown OAK, but given the choice, I will always prefer SJC over SFO.
It handles its current load much more gracefully.

~~~
bradknowles
I did a six month contract for Apple in Cupertino. I lived in a 1BR apartment
right on the border of Cupertino and San Jose, on Stevens Creek Blvd just west
of I-280.

On one occasion, I flew via SFO. I vowed to never ever do that again. From
that point forward, I always flew via SJC, and I was much, much happier. The
airport was clean, reasonably up-to-date, and never had major traffic problems
that I saw.

I would be very unhappy if that airport got shut down or crippled just because
some people want to build tall buildings in the area.

