I am absolutely AGAINST the Sanders/Jacobs plan; it deserves the largest stinkiest Onion the jury can muster. BUT ... the inaccuracies and irrelevancies of the nomination (presumably by SOHO) are egregious and deplorable. Statements like "plans to fill in Palm Canyon" (misleading partial-truth), "ruin Balboa Park just like Robert Moses' BQE screwed up New York City decades ago" (irrelevant partial-truth), and vitriol such as "While the motivations behind this abominable plan are unclear, it is important to note that Jacobs is a major financial supporter of the Old Globe, around which the plan appears to have been designed to singularly bennefit." have no place in a posting of this sort. SOHO absolutely MUST get off it's moralistic personally vituperative high-horse or risk losing much popular support.

Adoption of the Jacobs Plan would forever change the character of San Diego's most important civic asset. It offers a solution to a non-problem. Parking is not, and never has been a problem, except on December Nights. The unintended consequence will be paid parking, beginning with the new parking garage. People will walk a half mile to the free Zoo parking lot rather than pay to park in the new garage. The Zoological Society will then be forced to begin charging to park in its lot in order to assure sufficient space for zoo patrons.

This unprofessional nomination is full of conspiracy theories, misinformation, and misspellings. It’s not worth wasting the judges’ time on.

Add my vote for an Onion...the asphalt and guardrails Balboa By-Pass Bridge to valet parking idea stinks. Instead of removing cars from the park, it makes traffic permanent. Enough of phoney "philanthropy" that destroys cultural heritage, corrupts public institutions, and trades valuable future options for short sighted greed. This should be recognized as the most pungent and foul project in San Diego's history.

Any project that deals with a registered historical site is a complex one, and this one is no exception especially since Balboa Park is the cultural hub of San Diego. After looking at Irwin Jacob's plan, the SOHO Plan and the Precise Plan (which only differs a small amount from SOHO's), I must say that all three plans lack a certain responsibility and delicacy to the historical character of the park. Of course the big issue here I believe is the actual plaza itself. Many feel that having the plaza be closed to all automotive traffic is a great idea, and I must say that I agree. But there must also be more thought and heavy analysis into how the plaza would be used by pedestrians without the cars. Studies in human behavior in built environments have shown that people tend to stay and walk towards the outer areas of a plaza, and this becomes even more true as the plaza becomes larger. Outdoor spaces are also called outdoor rooms at times, but these spaces need to have features that allow the users to feel comfortable in such a large plaza. These are issues that really need to be looked at, and without looking at Irwin Jacob's plan in detail I must say that it is lacking considerably in this area. There are so many ideas that can be implemented at Balboa Park and specifically at Plaza de Panama, and I feel as though this project as well as the older Precise Plan do not take a thorough look at what is really needed and what is a great opportunity to enhance the park and San Diego as a whole. I must say that I fully agree with giving this project an onion, as I am sure there are better ways to spend the money and time. I hope that other plans and designs are introduced in the immediate future.

This deserves the Stinky Onion of the Century!!!

I have never had a major issue with the parking near or around the park. I also tend to walk or bike if I can. Any traffic issues that I have experienced have been insignificant. If I have to spend ten or so extra minutes getting through the area, it is not the end of the world. How about focusing the time and money on better public transportation so that people don't have to drive and park?

This project stinks ! Whew....

It is Ironic that those who want to do the so called "restoration" of Balboa Park know precious little about the history. If they had simply taken the time to study the previous work put into the Balboa Park Master Plan they might have learned something. Chiefly that the bypass idea had already been given a test drive, and it was rejected. What was called Alternate B of the Balboa Park Master Plan. It was a bypass bridge nearly identical to the one proposed by Irwin Jacobs. However through a careful review and vetting process that included not only the planners, but the City staff, as well as community input. Each and all decided "thumbs down" to the bypass. The bypass was rejected for exactly the same reasons we hear about today. Here are the four reasons cited then: 1. Severe impacts both visually and architecturally to a Spanish Colonial theme National Register Historic District. 2. Traffic and pedestrian conflicts that will occur at the Southeast approach portion of the Cabrillo Bridge where the bypass bridge butts in. 3. Visual impacts to Palm Canyon 4. Extremely poor cost to benefit ratio. An expensive and massive infrastructure project heavily laden with cutting, digging, grading, retaining wall construction, concrete, and asphalt. It was decided the money could be better spent elsewhere in the park for greater bang for the buck. According to Councilmember Gloria Balboa Park is $250 million dollars behind in maintenance and repairs, other wise known as "deferred maintenance." So the argument that the money could be better spent elsewhere is even more pertinent today than it was when the Master Plan was developed. Sources: Jay Schumaker and Vicki Estrada, who worked on the Master Plan, through numerous public presentations they've done in recent months. Rather than fighting the same battle all over again regarding the bypass, the Mayor should have called upon Mr. Jacobs to help fund the existing Balboa Park Master Plan. Instead spin was put forward that the plan sat on the shelf all these years because it failed to inspire support. The truth is the plan had achieved full funding and was ready to go. But then past Mayors and City Manager robbed those funds for other pet projects. I say we've had enough meddling by Mayors in Balboa Park. The whole situation reeks of extremely ripe onion. Dan Soderberg

This plan just may be the worst design and solution overkill to remove a few parking spaces ever to cross San Diego's path. The public process should get an onion all by itself, the plan and design another.Makes San Diego seem like some backwoods town with such an unsophisticated approach.

So the mayor and Irwin Jacobs took a walk through the park and Irwin envisioned a grand plan -- grand in that it focused almost entirely on valet parking for his friends, manipulation of Balboa Park institutions, destruction of a National Historical Landmark, introduction of more vehicles and paid parking, and an attempt to avoid property environmental review. The City Council, the Mayor, and the Plaza de Panama Committee should all share in a very stinky onion.

I can understand wanting to remove the parking from the Plaza de Panama and would nominate a plan to do so for an Orchid. But to spend 40 million dollars (15 million in public funds) on a "by-pass bridge" that would not only destroy the views and character of the historic Cabrillo ("Laurel Street") bridge but would require visitors to the park to pay to park for the first time in history. A classic case of "we must destroy it in order to save it" mentality. There are obvious, less expensive and less intrusive alternatives. If we are so concerned about the sanctity of the park perhaps we should ban people from it. Let get real and consider a more reasonable "both/and" solution. This plan stinks like dog poop.

This project seems to propose a task that is out of scale with the desired effect, which has been stated is to remove cars from the park and to reopen Plaza de Panama to pedestrians pursuant to its original use. Could not the goal be accomplished by simply removing the existing surface parking spaces located in the center of the Plaza, in the vicinity of the Museum of Art and the adjacent roundabout? Further removing vehicle access from the deck of the Cabrillo Bridge, except park shuttles, would help to eliminate traffic concerns and would provide a safe pedestrian environment for entering the west side of the Plaza from 6th Avenue. All parking lots could remain as they are currently configured at the northeast and southeast ends of the park, and along and across Park Boulevard. I do not see the necessity of altering the Cabrillo Bridge to restore Plaza de Panama. There is a disconnect in the project proposal when compared to the project goals.

Onion? How about Orchid! I'll take 6+ reclaimed acres of auto-free parkland over the current car-choked condition any day. From what I've seen the opposition still wants thousands of cars driving through the historic center of the park. Been there, done that. Orchid all the way and please finish by 2015.