|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Nov 30, 2017 12:25:50 GMT -8
Capacity
35k Seats
Additional SRO in Student Section
SRO in West Endzone
I got to believe that it will open with about 40k to 42k as capacity including the SRO...
This whole thing is outstanding...
The mall concept is similar to the area leading into the stadium in South Bend, lots of folks "tailgating" using tables and chairs etc in green spaces on campus.
|
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Nov 30, 2017 12:27:33 GMT -8
Anyone know why parking spaces are so few? Obviously, they plan on many using the trolley, but I think the SDSU plan was 5K parking spots? I would guess cost and they want to keep traffic to a minimum. |
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Nov 30, 2017 12:28:23 GMT -8
You should bid or work with the prime to become a sub-contractor the build-out. Sounds like you have experience in the field. Well, I did work as an estimator for a construction company for 10 years but common sense generally tells people to build up if you're building in an area prone to flooding. So you think that they have all of these experts working on this and that not a single one said, "we should check the water table" and or "maybe we shouldn't go down" Really? I am currently building a $175 food plant and we had to move dirt around, happens all the time and is way less expensive than building up, just like they said... |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Nov 30, 2017 12:30:36 GMT -8
Stadium currently budgeted at $250M which is $100M above what the university initially said they could budget. I don't see how they can expect to have the field 30' below grade which is being proposed to cut costs. At the current location of the Q you hit standing water within 2 feet. When the city looked at dropping the field at the Q they decided against it because it would require a very expensive active drainage system. Probably the reason they chose the NW corner of the property. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Nov 30, 2017 12:31:45 GMT -8
From December, 2010:   I know. I was there for the P-Bowl a few days later. A FEW days? Hell, it was the NEXT DAY!!! |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Nov 30, 2017 12:34:52 GMT -8
I know nothing about construction or development. But, I assume this cost was worked into the budget. From December, 2010. You just don't dig down in an area prone to flooding: They have already addressed this issue. Also--note the area that did not flood--the NW corner of the property. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Nov 30, 2017 12:36:36 GMT -8
Surface flow from the river won't be an issue because the deign of the project won't allow for it to get there otherwise the classrooms and restaurants would be flooded first. Now ground water could be an issue I guess but not to the magnitude of the photos but then again drains and underground parking structures will hinder that. Again, the water table is less than 2 feet below the current field level. Whenever you get any significant rain the field quickly becomes swampy. This proposal has them going 28' below the water table adjacent to a river. You can't "drain" uphill so you will have to have an active drainage system working 24/7/365. And it isn't just the field that will flood, you are looking at about 23' of seating area that would be below the water table. I do not expect them to build any classrooms, apartments or other occupied space below the water table though they likely will have some parking below grade that will be at risk of flooding when we get any significant rainfall. Much dirt will be moved at the site. This is being addressed. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Nov 30, 2017 12:43:08 GMT -8
Again, you don't have 30 feet anywhere on the site, not even close. And I am talking specifically as to where the stadium sits right now. Moving it over to the NW corner isn't going to be much more than a 2-3' difference if that. 2 -3' ?? try 10 times that. Plus the flood waters in the picture will never reach the stadium the way they do with a massive water retaining parking lot that currently exists. Plus there are ways to easily mitigate the river overflow during heave rains. A good storm drainage system throughout the development will also remove massive amounts of water flow. As it currently sits, the stadium parking lot is basically a giant catch basin of standing water from all the run off from the surrounding area and streets. No way that there is a two story difference in height from the lowest portion of the parking lot to its highest much less from where the current stadium sits and the proposed one does. |
|
|
|
Post by bagtec on Nov 30, 2017 12:45:03 GMT -8
Some people can’t even deal with renderings or a media presentation with out questioning everything and everyone. Just enjoy the day.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Nov 30, 2017 12:48:36 GMT -8
SDSU doesn't need dean spanos...
but don't kid yourself to think sdsu wouldn't partner with an mls or nfl team build the stadium.35k is too small for a big time program like sdsu. 45k is much better. Think big, become big. Sure, SDSU has said they want a partner. FS tried to screw them. It didn't work out. Oh well. SDSU and FS have two completely different visions of the entire q site. I am talking about the stadium portion of the project. And yes, I contend SDSU concurs with me. |
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Nov 30, 2017 12:48:37 GMT -8
Some people can’t even deal with renderings or a media presentation with out questioning everything and everyone. Just enjoy the day.  |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Nov 30, 2017 12:49:17 GMT -8
Well, I did work as an estimator for a construction company for 10 years but common sense generally tells people to build up if you're building in an area prone to flooding. So you think that they have all of these experts working on this and that not a single one said, "we should check the water table" and or "maybe we shouldn't go down" Really? I am currently building a $175 food plant and we had to move dirt around, happens all the time and is way less expensive than building up, just like they said... You building in a river bed? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 12:50:41 GMT -8
This is good news. But from what I am seeing regarding the design, those lower seats are too close to the field for football not futbal. No more tarping the first several rows for Aztec games please. Hope they get it right!!
Go Aztecs!! 🌽
|
|
|
|
Post by Pasadenaztec on Nov 30, 2017 12:54:44 GMT -8
I wonder what Landon Donovan has to say about all of this?
|
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Nov 30, 2017 13:30:47 GMT -8
Anyone who watched yesterdays presentation heard from the start how they are going to fix the flood plain
and build the development to work WITH the river not like how Qualcomm tried to build in spite of it.
Go back and watch for yourself before you try to discourage others into thinking this plan is not well thought out.
This plan and renderings are exactly what we need.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Nov 30, 2017 13:43:19 GMT -8
So you think that they have all of these experts working on this and that not a single one said, "we should check the water table" and or "maybe we shouldn't go down" Really? I am currently building a $175 food plant and we had to move dirt around, happens all the time and is way less expensive than building up, just like they said... You building in a river bed? No, but there was a natural creek flowing through the 80 acre site and we had to deal with water diversion as well as water tables, etc. Again, if you were an estimator for any large commercial projects then you should know what it would cost to raise a portion of the 220 acre site, actually moving ground away from the river area and know that it would be way, way cheaper than going up. |
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Nov 30, 2017 13:51:11 GMT -8
Sure, SDSU has said they want a partner. FS tried to screw them. It didn't work out. Oh well. SDSU and FS have two completely different visions of the entire q site. I am talking about the stadium portion of the project. And yes, I contend SDSU concurs with me. There are more than two groups, not FSI, who want to bring an MLS team to San Diego. One of them is starting with a NASL team and another is waiting to see what happens with SuckerCity and both have talked with SDSU. This stadium would host... 6-8 Aztec games Other SDSU and High School games 4-6 International and or Liga MX matches Many concerts and events The Holiday Bowl and eventually they will host 20 or so MLS matches... |
|
|
|
Post by pbnative on Nov 30, 2017 14:00:00 GMT -8
2 -3' ?? try 10 times that. Plus the flood waters in the picture will never reach the stadium the way they do with a massive water retaining parking lot that currently exists. Plus there are ways to easily mitigate the river overflow during heave rains. A good storm drainage system throughout the development will also remove massive amounts of water flow. As it currently sits, the stadium parking lot is basically a giant catch basin of standing water from all the run off from the surrounding area and streets. No way that there is a two story difference in height from the lowest portion of the parking lot to its highest much less from where the current stadium sits and the proposed one does. The USGS Topo map disagrees with you, the river is approx.40 ft, stadium sits at 60 ft, the north west corner is between 80 and 100 ft. viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=ustopo&title=US%20Topo%20DownloadAs Boise Aztec has pointed out, bringing in dirt is not hard to build up areas as needed and create a grade that water will flow away from the stadium into a drainage system, or even underground ground drainage pits designed to hold overflow during periods of large rain fall. If the stadium is built below grade, then dirt will be excavated and reused in other areas of the development as needed. Park-like Drainage basin pits can be created if needed for runoff, and the River park isn't just for pretty pictures. All that open land creates a natural flood barrier that absorbs water as opposed to asphalt and concrete that retains water and doesn't allow water to seep back into the ground. |
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Nov 30, 2017 14:03:07 GMT -8
Seats need to be a lot closer to the sidelines. One thing I hate about Qualcomm, seats were to far away.
|
|
|
|
Post by badfish on Nov 30, 2017 14:05:29 GMT -8
|
|
