|
Post by Ghost Dad on Apr 1, 2015 19:01:06 GMT -8
Don't disrespect me and I won't disrespect you. Simple as that. We can disagree without all the childish name calling. But you are a troll and your response to my comment by bringing up BYU pretty much proved it. Hi SDFF!!! There you go again with the name calling. I guess rules were made to be broken.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 19:03:58 GMT -8
But you are a troll and your response to my comment by bringing up BYU pretty much proved it. Hi SDFF!!! There you go again with the name calling. I guess rules were made to be broken. Troll is a title, not a name, now where it with pride SDFF
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Dad on Apr 1, 2015 19:06:45 GMT -8
There you go again with the name calling. I guess rules were made to be broken. Troll is a title, not a name, now where it with pride SDFF You mean wear it with pride?
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 1, 2015 19:09:36 GMT -8
Troll is a title, not a name, now where it with pride SDFF You mean wear it with pride? in the case of SDFF it would be where ... since no one knows where he went to school as he's lied mislead about it so often
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 19:11:59 GMT -8
Troll is a title, not a name, now where it with pride SDFF You mean wear it with pride? You just leveled up! Level 2 troll achieved. Nice work, SDFF.
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Dad on Apr 1, 2015 19:12:37 GMT -8
You mean wear it with pride? in the case of SDFF it would be where ... since no one knows where he went to school as he's lied mislead about it so often If SDFF lied about something, then he's in the wrong. Meanwhile I have no idea what this character has to do with me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 19:17:15 GMT -8
in the case of SDFF it would be where ... since no one knows where he went to school as he's lied mislead about it so often If SDFF lied about something, then he's in the wrong. Meanwhile I have no idea what this character has to do with me. Ok don't admit to being SDFF, even though it is painfully obvious. Tell me though, you created your account today and immediately dive headlong in the exact topic that seemed to fire up SDFF the most, does that seem strange to you? I mean if you were lurking before you signed up your claim to not know SDFF is obviously a lie...if you're going to do this maybe you should get someone to help you? Have any friends?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 19:18:45 GMT -8
in the case of SDFF it would be where ... since no one knows where he went to school as he's lied mislead about it so often If SDFF lied about something, then he's in the wrong. Meanwhile I have no idea what this character has to do with me. Lol, epic fail
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Apr 1, 2015 20:07:20 GMT -8
Troll is a title, not a name, now where it with pride SDFF You mean wear it with pride? Grammar police just like SDFF. Welcome back troll. How pathetic are you? Wow.
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Dad on Apr 1, 2015 20:17:11 GMT -8
You mean wear it with pride? Grammar police just like SDFF. Welcome back troll. How pathetic are you? Wow. I'm only here so I don't get fined.
|
|
|
Post by wayno503 on Apr 1, 2015 20:26:06 GMT -8
I'm sure somewhere in these 12 pages of comments the answer can be found in how to save the Chargers and build a new Aztec Warrior Stadium. We're just not looking hard enough!
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 2, 2015 8:40:39 GMT -8
I'm sure somewhere in these 12 pages of comments the answer can be found in how to save the Chargers and build a new Aztec Warrior Stadium. We're just not looking hard enough! "... Up to $350 million from the Chargers; $200 million from the NFL; $160 million from personal seat licenses; $35 million from investors and sponsorships; and $220 million in naming rights." Source: Councilman Scott Sherman If Scott Sherman can get the Chargers & their fans to pony up $965M (the sum total of the above quote) -- then problem solved, no need for mixed-use development. The site can be divided into 3 parts with the stadium in the NW corner, SDSU West Campus can be along the NE 60 acres of the site, while the 20 acre river park can run along the bottom of the site (tracing the trolley path and below) ... Parking could fill in everything in between. SDSU purchases their 60 acres for $2M/ acre or $120M - that money could go toward the creation of the river park (saving the City from having to spend money to do it).
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 2, 2015 9:33:43 GMT -8
How in the name of all that's holy did the city ever allow that fuel tank farm to be situated in that spot? That's the kind of business a well planned city like SD typically requires be placed nowhere near any potential residences. Gotta think somebody had major political clout. Or greased some palms at city hall.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 2, 2015 20:53:06 GMT -8
Looks like Scott Sherman's stadium plan is already on wobbly legs. www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/land-use/bunch-of-hot-air-rising-about-countys-role-in-stadium-plan/Bunch of Hot Air Rising About County’s Role in Stadium Plan "Sherman’s idea, however, is already wobbling. It says the city would need to sell the land under Qualcomm Stadium in several phases over about 10 years. This is interesting because it would switch a vote for the stadium from advisory to mandatory — the city cannot sell that much land without a vote of the people. But Gary London, the analyst behind it, says he wrote it wrong. “I should have said land value, not land sale,” he told me. OK then. Now this is interesting for another reason: If the city doesn’t sell the land to a developer, then the city would likely give a developer a long-term lease. This means that most of the housing units on the lease would have to be for-rent rather than for sale. If not, it gets super complicated. What’s more, the mayor’s task force immediately criticized Sherman’s plan. The highest density version of Sherman’s plan is apparently way more development than the task force plans to recommend. And yet, even the highest density version of the plan is barely enough if not enough to cover a $1 billion stadium plan, certainly far less than what would be needed with large infrastructure investments to cover all the new roads and transit accommodations needed to make Mission Valley at all manageable."
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 3, 2015 15:41:40 GMT -8
I'm sure somewhere in these 12 pages of comments the answer can be found in how to save the Chargers and build a new Aztec Warrior Stadium. We're just not looking hard enough! "... Up to $350 million from the Chargers; $200 million from the NFL; $160 million from personal seat licenses; $35 million from investors and sponsorships; and $220 million in naming rights." Source: Councilman Scott Sherman If Scott Sherman can get the Chargers & their fans to pony up $965M (the sum total of the above quote) -- then problem solved, no need for mixed-use development. The site can be divided into 3 parts with the stadium in the NW corner, SDSU West Campus can be along the NE 60 acres of the site, while the 20 acre river park can run along the bottom of the site (tracing the trolley path and below) ... Parking could fill in everything in between. SDSU purchases their 60 acres for $2M/ acre or $120M - that money could go toward the creation of the river park (saving the City from having to spend money to do it). [/quote That could work… some more info... "It's clear the phased redevelopment is what allows sales of the Qualcomm land to have a higher value. Otherwise, the land sales would be significantly less than $337M. I'm also guessing the land would have to be fully entitled for this development before a developer made the purchase. This is the single biggest hurdle for the project at Mission Valley, and the biggest impediment to the city and county recouping their investment." PSLs, Naming Rights, and Chargers contribution are pie in the sky numbers. www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2015/4/2/8328843/does-scott-shermans-chargers-stadium-plan-work-qualcomm-mission-valleySale of land…. not going to happen without a vote. Entitlement is a major concern for this project.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 7, 2015 8:21:22 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 7, 2015 8:49:29 GMT -8
Gotta love how the U-T worded the headline. Also gotta love the laissez-faire attitude toward a huge local employer by some at City Hall. Also gotta ask, Where's the leadership? Idiots running the city + idiots managing the Chargers = no new stadium in SD.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2015 10:18:09 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2015 11:17:57 GMT -8
To say the least...seems impossible that the city would be unaware of Qualcomm's dissatisfaction.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 7, 2015 17:15:11 GMT -8
Seems to me a lot of people wouldn't care if SD loses the Chargers, Comic-Con and Qualcomm as long as they conceive that they don't have to pay anything...
|
|