I spent the weekend at Lake Tahoe, enjoying the life that lake people lead, and it got me thinking: Where is our waterfront?
There is something about a body of water that makes it a relaxing and social meeting place; a place where things happen and people want to be. Though we are a city nestled in a valley and we have bodies of water that could serve as destinations, it seems no one has thought to do so.
Take the Guadalupe River for instance. Yes, it’s true that we won’t win any awards for “cleanest river” or “most fishable river” anytime soon, but many parts of the river are so beautiful and untouched that they would serve as a wonderful backdrop for homes and restaurants. Down by the Arena, the park has been made a riverside meeting place. Why can’t that concept be taken even further by building a group of outdoor restaurants or coffee shops? People love being near water, and just like the lack of outdoor seating in restaurants, we don’t have any beautiful backdrops for people to look at here in San Jose. When is the last time you looked out a window from a restaurant, bar or coffee shop in San Jose and thought: Wow, that is beautiful? Probably never.
We also have a number of smaller lakes in San Jose—Lake Almaden, Lake Cunningham and Anderson Lake to name a few. Why can this concept be applied to them? In Tahoe you find place after place along the lake where people can dock their boats and go enjoy a meal, live music or a beverage. I know it’s unrealistic to think that the environment of Lake Tahoe can be duplicated, but can’t we wish for things on a smaller scale for San Jose? Residents of Las Vegas would be the first to tell you that manmade lakes and oceans have transformed their town, so would it be outlandish to suggest that a city like ours take advantage of the weather and build our own waterfront?
Great cities have uniqueness, borrow ideas and concepts from other great cities, and have meeting places where people congregate. I want to see someone have some vision for those things in San Jose.
I spent the weekend at Lake Tahoe, enjoying the life that lake people lead, and it got me thinking: Where is our waterfront?
Alviso. Extend light rail down First St. all the way to the water.
Lets move the airport to moffit and make the current airport a lake.
This is San Jose Inside. You’re supposed to obsess over downtown. Stop talking about other things because people can’t bitch about thugs and gangsters in Almaden.
#2
Although I suspect you are being facetious, you do have a valid idea. The current location of SJI is unacceptable, and it must go.
By using the 1000s of acres of wasted airport land in a more intelligent, constructive manner we will increase tax revenue, and make the quality of life better throughout Northern Santa Clara County.
So, let’s move this thing to Hollister, and quit wasting so much money on it. The “benefits” from a downtown airport are dubious at best, and will still, for the most part, be realized even if it is in Hollister.
#2 and 4 stole my idea! (jk). Actually, the City of SJ, SC Co., and MTC should start planning for a new SJC southeast of Gilroy and north of Hollister. I realize that SJC is undergoing a $1.5 billion renovation, but we have to start thinking 30-50 years down the road. The land is there in south county, and the current airport site could reap billions of dollars in development…INCLUDING A LAKE WITH A WATERFRONT. And as I stated in an earlier post, the current SJC terminal could act as a maglev rail station, connecting travelers (in 15 minutes!) to the new JOHN STEINBECK, SAN JOSE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT…Gateway to San Jose, Silicon Valley and the Central Coast. Just a thought all.
I agree as well that SJC should be moved. The airport is wedged between two freeways and thus cannot accomodate bigger planes and international travel. Building a new terminal at the exising airport is putting a $10 haircut on a two dollar head.
A real airport in So. County would be a terminal for high speed rail from SoCal and a BART line following the 101 corridor. Then BART could then come up through downtown and further up north to Millbrae making it a true Bay Area Transit.
The costs could be offset once we get taller buildings downtown and develop some of the existing airport land.
Then San Jose can become a real city, the capital of Silicon Valley.
Great ideas regarding SJC.
Let us call on this blog and all politicians, except those in the pocket of the current airport developers and supporters, to immediately stop all work on SJC and move SJC to South County, or further.
Are you guys this dense? If the airport is moved all the way to Hollister, all that business travel goes through SFO. People use SJC because of “Silicon Valley.” Move it from that and you have a concrete field with some buildings.
I also think that a better place can be located for the airport. Developing the land that the airport occupies would help pay to build a new airport in a better location. How about in Coyote Valley instead of houses and retail. At the same time, how about also moving Reid Hillview Airport. This is a disaster waiting to happen with all the houses surroundig this airport. I know the airport was here firs but that argument is getting old. There’s a lot of development that has taken place that people are angry about and the same argument could also be used in their case. How about the Silicone Valley Chinese Temple on Alvin. The neighbors are not happy with this facility, can we use the same argument that we were here first? Move both airports and make veryone happy. Oops, I forgot the pilots. Oh well, you can’t please everyone.
All of this talk about moving the airport is a waste of hot air – ain’t gonna happen! Popeye has it right – Alviso is a potential gem.
ummm, does not building on the guadalupe have something to do with its historic floods?
San Jose has over years done some really dumb things to prevent our city from having enough jobs, tax money and good city design to becoming a great city
Moving airport to Hollister / Salinas has to be the worst job, economic and tax disasters that any bozo has recently suggested
Building a 2nd airport south of San Jose is needed since SFO, OAK and SJC will be at capacity in 5-10 years Closing SJC is dumb
What do you bozos work for San Francisco and Oakland politicians or are downtown property owners ?
Today is not Friday, so why the funny blog comments? It has to be a joke
You can’t be serious or are you so out of touch with reality to suggest moving the airport and don’t get the negatives to San Jose SJI is supposed to be about improving our city not making it worse.
San Jose has hundreds of acres of underutilized buildings and empty land and can not attract jobs so why spend billions to move airport, lose jobs and taxes when we can not fill our empty buildings
#8
So what if some business travel goes through SFO instead of SJC in Hollister?
The business people will still be coming to the businesses located in this area, staying at hotels in this area, eating in this area, and spending their money in this area.
The few dollars spent internal to the airport are trivial compared to what will be generated by an intelligent use of the land.
Can you get someone from the Friends of the Guadalupe River to respond and answer these questions.
They’re a good group and know the history of decisions and master plan for the river.
14: So what? Money doesn’t matter anymore? SJC is how San Jose still benefits from the big companies located in those little towns to the north and west. Without the airport, nothing at all is gained from the business conducted across city lines.
#16
Most of the land used by the airport is barren. It produces nothing. In essence, it is wasted.
The ‘X’ number of dollars generated each year by the amount of land required by the airport is minor compared to the amount of money that would be generated by a more intelligent use of the land. This is not even taking to account the increased standard of living and quality of life throughout Northern Santa Clara County, including San Jose.
Adding in the additional tax income generated by being able to expand San Jose higher and wider and we can easily see that the current location of the airport is an all around loser.
We all lose by not moving SJC to South County.
What is an intelligent use of the airport land that benefits San Jose’s future and our residents?
Intelligent San Jose land use is an oxymoron while San Jose continues to practice special interest land use
1) ” Most of the land used by the airport is barren. It produces nothing. In essence, it is wasted. ” Seems you forgot about –
Economic Impact
SJC Generates:
• 70,000 jobs in the San José area
• $4 billion a year in direct business spending in the local community
• $136.6 million a year in operating revenue
Maintenance and Operation Fund $111.9 million – Adopted 2006/07 No city general taxpayer funds are used for the operation or development of the Airport. It is a self supporting enterprise with revenues coming from user fees and federal grants.
2) What amount of money would be generated by a more intelligent use of airport land since
a) most property taxes and sales taxes do not go to San Jose
b) San Jose has millions sq ft empty office and industrial buildings
c) homes do not pay for city services they require
3) How would you make up loss of jobs and taxes from jobs?
4) What additional tax income from expanding San Jose higher based on San Jose’s low percentage of property and sales taxes ?
5) What do you mean wider since airport borders City of Santa Clara, Highway 101 and Highway 87 and 880 ?
6) New SJC airport not in San Jose would require tens billions to purchase land and build airport and local cities / county would want their cut of millions airport revenues since it would cut into any future south county or Salinas airport expansion
7) There is no assurance of new airport approval due to county land use restrictions even after spending millions and 10-15 years in approval process because environmental groups will take new airport to court delaying airport for 15-20 years and increasing billions in costs with south county cities, Salinas and Monterey county probably joining lawsuit against new SJO airport
Waiting your answers
Don’t want to ignore the original topic of Single Gal, so very quickly: the city and water district should figure out a way to increase water flow in the Guadalupe River, creating rapids along the course (similar to the Truckee River in downtown Reno). In short, turn the Guadalupe “creek” into a real river!
Now, back to the “New SJC.” My thinking is 30-50 years into the future; not 15-20 years. A new airport on the border of SC and San Benito Co. could be a joint operation of San Jose/SC Co., San Benito and Monterey Co.‘s (similar to Caltrains current arrangement)…hence “gateway to the Central Coast.” Cost of building new airport could be shared by three county’s, including money’s generated by SJ rezoning and/or selling off current airport land. San Jose still makes money from said airport by the thousands of travelers using the new Mineta Maglev terminal (which would still have ticketing, baggaging, parking, rental car services, etc). Could you all imagine San Jose’s population in the year 2030? It will make perfect sense then to relocate SJC and develop the current site for housing, office/retail, and LARGE LAKE WITH A WATERFRONT. By the way #13, this isn’t a joke…this is a great idea that should get some serious thought in the future.
One more thing regarding a possible new SJC: San Diego appears to be planning for an eventual replacement for Lindburgh Field (it’s not a joke to them)…check it out!
http://www.san.org/documents/assp/assp_executive_summary.pdf
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/maglev_train_proposals
The City of San Jose, Santa Clara, San Benito and Monterey County’s should start planning as well.
SJC will become over capacity at some future date; when, who knows?
Moffett is a great resource—it’s already there, and there would be far fewer environmental questions than building a new airport in South County. Undoubtedly someone would find an endangered bug or weed in South County, which would tie the prohject in litigation for a decade. Homeowners in the Moffett flight path would also undoubtedly sue over the noise, if nothing else.
There seems to be no answer that would not stir controversy.
Closing SJC would trigger environmental reviews, and the cleanup of the toxics would also stall any development for at least a decade. Besides, with so many empty buildings in SJ, we don’t need to build more. in twenty years most manufacturing/industrial will be gone from this Valley due to wage costs alone. Homes on SJC, if it were to close, would be out of the question.
We will need to find more takeoff and landing capacity in a couple of decades, so we’d better start thinking about it now. Whatever the decision, it will be a full employment act for lawyers and “experts”.
#19 said of SJC:
Economic Impact
SJC Generates:
• 70,000 jobs in the San José area
• $4 billion a year in direct business spending in the local community
• $136.6 million a year in operating revenue
These numbers are primarily from voodoo economics, which is how most airport benefits are calculated. In economic terms, the majority of airport jobs, spending, and revenue fall into the “induced” and “indirect” categories. Little falls into the “direct” category.
The problem with “induced” and “indirect” numbers is that they are just a guess since they cannot be measured, versus the “direct” impact of the airport itself, which is measurable.
Additionally, notice the phrase “”San Jose area”. Basically, this means all of Santa Clara County.
Nice try though.
Now for some real data: Here is the “Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2006”, http://www.sjc.org/about/CAFR/CAFR2006.pdf,
While to an individual the numbers might appear large, from a comparable business perspective (Cisco, HP, Google, etc.) they are minor. When you consider the revenue per acre then it becomes even more apparent that the airport is a bad deal. For example, in the 2006 report it states that operating revenue for 2006 is $95 million (not the $136.6 million quoted above). Since the airport is on 1050 acres , that results in an annual revenue of $95,000 dollars per acre. That is an abysmal return on the use of land in such a prime location.
(Acres: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/planning/EIR/SJIA_UPDATE/5thAmend_SJIA.pdf)
Throw in the negative manner in which the airport affects everyday life then it becomes an even worse deal.
As a side-note, the report also states that the airport itself provided 388 jobs in 2006. Add in the jobs for the airline employees, car rental companies, and other minor airport businesses and we are looking at around 1000 to 2000 jobs total. Not bad for 1000 acres. Not!
One more point is that the 1050 acres does not include the land directly North and South of the airport. This land is in the airport safety zone. Since this land cannot be developed in a productive, useful manner it is, essentially, only marginally useful. Consequently, if this land is included in the revenue per acre calculation for the airport the $95,000 per acre will be even lower, depending on how many acres are in the safety zone.
Amusingly, 75% of airport revenue is generated from parking and rental fees. From page 35 of the 2006 report:
“As illustrated in the above graph, parking and roadway revenue represents 35.6% of the total operating revenues. Parking includes public parking, employee parking, rental car ready and return stalls, lease of rental car lots, and taxicab and other ground transportation fees. Public parking is the largest source of the Airport’s revenues. The next largest category is revenue from terminal buildings/concessions at 22.9%, which includes concession fees from rental cars, food and beverage, news and gift shop, advertising, and telephone. Fees for the use of the FIS facility and rental of space, other than airline space, are also included in this category. The airline terminal rental and landing fee revenues represent 16.7% and 9.5%…”
What a great use of 1000 acres in downtown San Jose.
Developing the airport land along the lines of North First Street for high-tech, increasing building height in San Jose, providing recreational facilities for area residents, and improving the quality and standard of living will easily offset any loss to San Jose from moving the airport.
Despite what airport boosters like to say, the truth is, in nearly all instances, cities and counties lose money on a daily basis with airports, versus using the land in a more intelligent, productive manner.
Everyone except city staff and Council agrees San Jose uses ” voodoo economics” to calculate economic impacts and jobs numbers which no one believes San Jose has wasted billions on economic development and tax subsidies to corporations, developers and non profits and still can not generate enough jobs and taxes
We have hundreds of empty buildings, unused land and people going to other cities for jobs
Provide job and tax numbers to show moving airport to south county will fix not add to our tax and jobs problems with billions to debt problem and San Jose will be in court for years and still not get new airport approval
We brought this upon ourselves in 1945 when Ernie Renzel was chosen as mayor. Ernie Renzel selected the site and spearheaded the effort for San Jose Airport. We’ve been paying the price for the last 62 years.
Ernie Renzel put the airport as far out on the edge of town as was possible in 1945. If he went any further north he’d either have ended up in Santa Clara or unincorporated land, or at the time, paving over productive and lucrative farmland and orchards. I don’t know what sort of land use was happening on the site of the current airport in 1945.
I am not defending the airport’s current location. I have been in favor of Moffet becoming SJC for a good 25 years or more. But think about 1945. The post-war suburban building boom wasn’t even on the local radar yet. The jet airplane wasn’t either, or at the very least was not anticipated to arrive at SJC anytime soon. Ernie lacked some vision and could likely never have imagined the steamroller of the Dutch Hamman administration starting to pave over the entire valley floor a decade or so later. 20 years after Ernie broke ground on the corrugated original terminal, it was clear that the airport was in the wrong spot. That’s when the time came to act but instead, then as now, the “leadership” in this town opted to build a brand new terminal instead of exploring relocation.
In the 70’s there was a proposal to move SJC closer to Alviso, with the approach path aligned directly over an already noise-generating Bayshore freeway. It was a great solution. Milpitas raised a stink (pun fully intended) and effectively killed the plan. The big town with no cajones ran off with tail permanently positioned between legs. It happened again when Bob Lurie wanted to relocate the Giants to SJ. Feinstein said “Boo!” and SJ “leaders” did an immediate 180.
Suggestion to the mainly deadbeat occupants of 200 E Santa Clara: Get with Barry Bonds and have whatever BALCO cocktail he’s having. I don’t care by what means you get there, but you need to get pumped up and start throwing your weight around as the most populous city in northern California.
Which brings me back around to Alviso again. Our pathetic mudflat waterfront. It was a busy port at one time. The city annexed it and let it languish. The marina is nothing but weeds and mud. There’s your waterfront SG, San Jose style.
Anthony – Look at
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/airports/resources/publications/reports/media/fact_2.pdf
and you will see that both SFO and OAK need capacity so moving SJC to south county is not realistic or practical and if anythng Northern Californa needs additional regional small airports capacity at Monterey Peninsula Airport, Santa Rosa, Stockton, and possibly Hollister Municipal Airport and Salinas Municipal Airport with Moffett Field sometimes mentioned
The biggest problem with moving the airport to Moffett or to South County and making the current SJC a lake is that the lake would be located in Santa Clara County. Thus, the Santa Clara County Water District would take control and would needs at least $1-2 billion more a year in operating expenses. Salaries would have to be tripled because of the responsibility of managing such a large body of water. At least 100 more upper level staff people including public relations staff would be needed at approximately $200K per year due to the seriously increased work load. The travel budget for the existing staff and the new staff would have to be tripled. Getting to and from a new airport by limo which is further away would cost so much more. Think about the financial consequences before building any more water related infrastructure.
I visited San Jose’s ONLY waterfront last Sunday evening…Except for my dinner at Vahl’s, the Alviso/waterfront is still as disgusting as it has ever been…The South Bay Yacht Club? That’s an oxymoron if I’ve ever heard one…
I repeat “Alviso has potential” – with enough money and imagination San Jose could, once again, have a waterfront.
Mac, I agree with you. Alviso totally has more potential than any other part of town, even downtown. Plus excellent weather. Just don’t hold your breath waiting for a development plan. Why a city would want to annex an entire town just to let it lanquish for almost 40 years running at this point, is beyond me.
Alviso was the shipping hub of the Bay Area at the turn of the twentieth century. The Alviso Yacht Club was a big deal and paddlewheelers & powered barges plied Alviso Slough. Before he hit the bigtime, my grandfather played the clubs & dives in Alviso during the 1910s and had some great stories about the port. The Alviso Library has a nice little history section.
Unfortunately, the slough was allowed to silt up and inviting the mosquitoes to return.
Think about what it would be like if the port were dredged open again, with pleasure boats, steamboats and bay tours plying the slough. Open some wharf-side restaurants and dives, a few tourist shops and San Jose would have a first class waterfront ala Alameda island.
Plank walkways could connect to the wharf offering a wetlands tour like that in Hayward. So much could be done.
Time for a grass-roots effort to put us back on the Bay! Good thinking folks.
BTW – anybody tried Rosita’s in Alviso lately? It’s as great as ever. Alviso still has good eats!
A major problem at this time with Alviso is that aircraft departing SJC fly over it as they make their turn in order to circle and gain altitude. As your conversation and thinking is disrupted by the aircraft, it ruins any pleasure and ambiance gained by sitting on the water’s edge and enjoying a meal and drink(s).
So, in order to develop Alviso to its potential we need to first move SJC to Hollister.
It would be great to have waterside resturants and downtown Alviso waterfront on bay
What about costs, pollution from mercury and lawsuits to dredge bay and Alviso waterfront ?
Hasn’t Alviso already sink by 6-8 feet and going down further so Alviso waterfront is not practicable due to flooding and cost of fill or dikes for town ?
There are so many barriers to moving San Jose airport that only dreamers and those without facts or understanding od issues advocate for it and waste everyone’s time
I used to love to go to the 94th Air Squadron restaurant, before they closed it down. Having a nice candle lit dinner, whilst watching the planes take off and land was really relaxing. The ambiance of the old wood, stone fireplace, and old photos was just awesome. The food was incredible! I was really saddened when they decided to close.
SG is right. Having a place to eat, drink coffee, whilst gazing at a lake would be lovely. One of the reasons I love going to Half Moon Bay or Santa Cruz so much is because you can do just that! Half Moon Bay has a restaurant that has outside seating with open fire pits. Folks sit around the fire chatting, having refreshments, drinks, and getting to know one another. They have live music indoors that you can hear outside. It’s really quite lovely. You can even bring your dog to sit by the fire with you!
I’ve often wondered the same thing SG asked. Why doesn’t our City do some of the things small towns, or other cities do? Downtown Campbell holds classic car shows complete with outdoor movies, live music, outdoor seating to eat, drink and relax, art shows, crafts shows, and late night shopping! They have some really nice events there. I know the businesses and vendors who participate clean up!
Its just too bad San Jose doesn’t follow the lead of cities that do so well.
Look what Hong Kong is making out of the former Kai Tak International Airport site:
http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/about/achievements/regional/images/southe_kowloon_a.jpg
I’m pretty confident the City of San Jose could make billions off of the current SJC site. We could also have a nice waterfront from SJC northward to Alviso (in the form of SJC lake, Guadalupe REAL river, and Alviso Marina).
Re: 34 – Mercury? The mercury in the Bay was down with the tailings from the gold fields in the Sierra and from ballast dropped by ships in the upper Bay as well as shipyard construction there. Alviso Slough has none of those issues.
As for #33 – Hey, I work directly under the flightpath & sit out at lunch at times to enjoy the planes. On man’s treasure, y’all.
Alviso is San Jose’s red-headed step-child, begging for support and care. Meanwhile, San Jose suffers from a lack of a waterside identity. It’s match that only a politician could overlook.
I thought Alviso was now part of San Jose..