|
|
Post by aardvark on Dec 1, 2017 11:44:24 GMT -8
It would be nonsense for anyone to think that our proposed new stadium could be expanded to accommodate the NFL. This is merely fodder to gain votes from the "bitter clingers" for a new NFL team. The NFL---with their $1.5 billion, and more, requisite expenditure on a new facility, would never allow their palace to be mounted upon, the---by comparison--Dixie Cup that we'll be propping up. I do agree that no NFL will come to play in our stadium. But even though its temporary did anyone really believe you'd see the CHARGERS playing at a tiny soccer stadium below 30k seats? Not me. As for context, between SDSUWest and Soccer City... The most realistic option is the SDSUWest path of expansion and or partnering with an NFL team. Soccer City has an open plot of acreage for an NFL team. But theres no way two stadiums on that site would ever get approved from the city power brokers. Soccer City put that blank piece of land (allegedly for stadium--that would only be available for 5 years under their plan) into their proposal for the same reason that SDSU has said their proposed stadium could be expanded for an NFL team--to tug at the hearts of jilted local NFL fans and gain votes for their initiatives. Nothing more. |
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Dec 1, 2017 11:50:23 GMT -8
Hmmm. So you think this is a "plan", eh? First, let's get it right: The Wickster, then Hirshy and Sterky. I will say, that The Wickster did come through on the "pretty pictures", as he promised. So they've sprung for maybe $75,000 to a hundred G's on this so far. Impressive, for SDSU. Good for them and I do like their dream vision---however it is vastly under-parked and under-served by retail. With huge housing and office components, there will be far too little shopping available for potentially 10,000 people who could be living and working there. For example, a neighborhood of only 3,000 homes requires a major supermarket (say 55,000 SF, not 12,000 sf mentioned) to support that population. But in my opinion, they have given us no more of a real plan, than they did 6 months ago. The fact that they have NOT, as yet, even broached the subject (according to the UT) of how they'll generate about $15 million per year in income to support the previously underestimated stadium cost, is troubling---to be kind. People on this board were smart enough to know that it would be $250 to $300 million, while The Wickster was ignorantly spouting off $150 million. I was unpleasantly surprised to learn that they had not even done the basic homework of exploring different income streams from the potential targets, BEFORE putting this out there. That should have been something they did 6 months ago. The fact that JMI has no "skin in the game" is also very disappointing. I had---evidently incorrectly--assumed that SDSU would actually have a deep-pocket developer as a partner. I see disaster in the making with this group, as well as years of lawsuits. They'd probably be better off to just try to go the condemnation route, as others have mentioned. MOW, to address one of your points, you do realize that the Fenton Marketplace Center is basically right next door the location and they have a variety of places to shop, including, Lowes. Costco, IKEA plus numerous restaurants. And I'm not sure that we know right if there would or would not be a supermarket. That's a bit premature I would think. The supermarket was just one example. No one living in this project is going to walk over to any of that at Fenton Marketplace---which of course means that they'll have to drive. In this anti-auto political correct world we now find ourselves, one would think that the super-smart academes and their hires, would have thought of that. People, in general, shop at grocery stores 3 times a week, drug stores about half that frequency. The "big boxes" are not needed at this site, but many other types will be needed---that is why FS had 700,000 sf or so. Another insight, Sudberry is building almost 800,000 SF of retail down the street at Civita, and I know, that if there is going to be a significant retail component at this site, they will be all over it. So, for those who think there is no need, then they must feel that Sudberry is ignorant about such matters. And I know of another major developer outside San Diego who'd love to do a million sf at this location. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecfred on Dec 1, 2017 12:13:02 GMT -8
So what becomes of the property across the street, on north side of Friars Rd? Is it included? Will it continue to b a parking lot? Don't care about Chargers park.
|
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Dec 1, 2017 12:24:52 GMT -8
So what becomes of the property across the street, on north side of Friars Rd? Is it included? Will it continue to b a parking lot? Don't care about Chargers park. Whoever ends up with it, will likely build high density apartments/condos. |
|
|
|
Post by azteca on Dec 1, 2017 12:25:02 GMT -8
MOW, to address one of your points, you do realize that the Fenton Marketplace Center is basically right next door the location and they have a variety of places to shop, including, Lowes. Costco, IKEA plus numerous restaurants. And I'm not sure that we know right if there would or would not be a supermarket. That's a bit premature I would think. The supermarket was just one example. No one living in this project is going to walk over to any of that Fenton Marketplace---which of course means that they'll have to drive. In this anti-auto political correct world we now find ourselves, one would think that the super-smart academes and their hires, would have thought of that. People, in general, shop at grocery stores 3 times a week, drug stores about half that frequency. The "big boxes" are not needed at this site, but many other types will be needed---that is why FS had 700,000 sf or so. Another insight, Sudberry is building almost 800,000 SF of retail down the street at Civita, and I know, that if there is going to be a significant retail component at this site, they will be all over it. So, for those who think there is no need, then they must feel that Sudberry is ignorant about such matters. And I know of another major developer outside San Diego who'd love to do a million sf at this location. I'm not inferring anyone is ignorant. What I'm saying is that you not I really know how anyone will use what's in the area, but it is silly to infer that no one will walk may not be the case either. The millennials might surprise you. Plus the trolley is right there.You're most likely more knowledgeable about a lot of these things but I'm not sure you have all the answers like you always seem to. |
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Dec 1, 2017 12:31:07 GMT -8
The supermarket was just one example. No one living in this project is going to walk over to any of that Fenton Marketplace---which of course means that they'll have to drive. In this anti-auto political correct world we now find ourselves, one would think that the super-smart academes and their hires, would have thought of that. People, in general, shop at grocery stores 3 times a week, drug stores about half that frequency. The "big boxes" are not needed at this site, but many other types will be needed---that is why FS had 700,000 sf or so. Another insight, Sudberry is building almost 800,000 SF of retail down the street at Civita, and I know, that if there is going to be a significant retail component at this site, they will be all over it. So, for those who think there is no need, then they must feel that Sudberry is ignorant about such matters. And I know of another major developer outside San Diego who'd love to do a million sf at this location. I'm not inferring anyone is ignorant. What I'm saying is that you not I really know how anyone will use what's in the area, but it is silly to infer that no one will walk may not be the case either. The millennials might surprise you. Plus the trolley is right there.You're most likely more knowledgeable about a lot of these things but I'm not sure you have all the answers like you always seem to. Well, now you're sounding like my ex-wife. LOL. Question, would you walk to Ikea, or Lowes and schlep back to your office, dorm, or condo, with a bed, or cabinets? And of course you're right about walking, I said "no one", but I assumed most would understand that as hyperbole. The idea, is to reduce the traffic, not increase. Having close proximity to a great many shopping choices as possible, for so many thousands who would be working and living in this project makes the most sense, yes? |
|
|
|
Post by azteca on Dec 1, 2017 12:59:57 GMT -8
I'm not inferring anyone is ignorant. What I'm saying is that you not I really know how anyone will use what's in the area, but it is silly to infer that no one will walk may not be the case either. The millennials might surprise you. Plus the trolley is right there.You're most likely more knowledgeable about a lot of these things but I'm not sure you have all the answers like you always seem to. Well, now you're sounding like my ex-wife. LOL. Question, would you walk to Ikea, or Lowes and schlep back to your office, dorm, or condo, with a bed, or cabinets? And of course you're right about walking, I said "no one", but I assumed most would understand that as hyperbole. The idea, is to reduce the traffic, not increase. Having close proximity to a great many shopping choices as possible, for so many thousands who would be working and living in this project makes the most sense, yes? I don't disagree with some of what you say, but I think that with so many shopping venues close by(Ikea is a bad example for walking, by the way) really minimizes the need for a lot of major stores. The Soccer City would have a far bigger impact on traffic. Just my opinion. Think there is much that has been researched of which we are not aware. We shall see. |
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Dec 1, 2017 14:21:43 GMT -8
I do agree that no NFL will come to play in our stadium. But even though its temporary did anyone really believe you'd see the CHARGERS playing at a tiny soccer stadium below 30k seats? Not me. As for context, between SDSUWest and Soccer City... The most realistic option is the SDSUWest path of expansion and or partnering with an NFL team. Soccer City has an open plot of acreage for an NFL team. But theres no way two stadiums on that site would ever get approved from the city power brokers. Soccer City put that blank piece of land (allegedly for stadium--that would only be available for 5 years under their plan) into their proposal for the same reason that SDSU has said their proposed stadium could be expanded for an NFL team--to tug at the hearts of jilted local NFL fans and gain votes for their initiatives. Nothing more. I agree. But at the least the SDSUWest option is more realistic in accomodating both the NFL, MLS & College Fball. The Soccer City option is virtually impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec92 on Dec 1, 2017 15:35:41 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. Yes, but will there be a regulation size football field in the stadium or will it be a few feet short? |
|
|
|
Post by tonatiuh on Dec 1, 2017 15:54:26 GMT -8
The Stadium appears to have a shallow climb from the front seats up to the back. Hopefully that does not interfere with vision to the field because the row in front of you is not low enough.
I have three questions about the overall design. 1. Does the press box/media area only have one or two levels? (I've seen several stories at other stadiums) 2. Will all the seats be individual seats w/backs like we currently enjoy at the Q? 3. I didn't hear, or notice anything about parking.
Is it going to be underground, or above, and how much will there be?
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecnails on Dec 1, 2017 15:56:30 GMT -8
This proposal looks like Sam Boyd in Las Vegas. A stadium where the AZTECS have played well recently. The 24 hour fitness fence damaged by that 4-day storm is still not fixed down from the non-ward street entrance. That flood filled the whole 24-hour parking lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by junior on Dec 1, 2017 16:38:42 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 tries to build inspite of it. Go back and watch for yourself before you try to discourage others into thinking this plan is not well thought it. This plan and renderings are exactly what we need. Yes, they said yesterday the were going to build up the stadium site and return the river to its original flow before Qualcomm was built. Well, those of us who have been around long enough to remember the dairy farms in MV before Qualcomm and all of the "improvements" also remember what happened when it rained. So hopefully, returning the river to its original flow before Qualcomm was built really means about the time Father Serra got here… |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Dec 1, 2017 16:57:20 GMT -8
The Stadium appears to have a shallow climb from the front seats up to the back. Hopefully that does not interfere with vision to the field because the row in front of you is not low enough. I have three questions about the overall design. 1. Does the press box/media area only have one or two levels? (I've seen several stories at other stadiums) 2. Will all the seats be individual seats w/backs like we currently enjoy at the Q? 3. I didn't hear, or notice anything about parking.
Is it going to be underground, or above, and how much will there be?In thhe presentation on SDSU Mission Valley it was said that there would be 1,000 tailgate parking spaces in the sports fields to the northwest of the stadium. There will be an additional 5,000 underground parking places under the buildings to the south. |
|
|
|
Post by Spud on Dec 1, 2017 18:14:54 GMT -8
The Stadium appears to have a shallow climb from the front seats up to the back. Hopefully that does not interfere with vision to the field because the row in front of you is not low enough. I have three questions about the overall design. 1. Does the press box/media area only have one or two levels? (I've seen several stories at other stadiums) 2. Will all the seats be individual seats w/backs like we currently enjoy at the Q? 3. I didn't hear, or notice anything about parking.
Is it going to be underground, or above, and how much will there be?In thhe presentation on SDSU Mission Valley it was said that there would be 1,000 tailgate parking spaces in the sports fields to the northwest of the stadium. There will be an additional 5,000 underground parking places under the buildings to the south. Not nearly enough tailgating spots...and a total of 6000 spots for a stadium that sized is horrible. Plan on paying $100 to park...otherwise have fun waiting for our s#!++y trolley system to get you in/out. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Dec 1, 2017 18:17:46 GMT -8
In thhe presentation on SDSU Mission Valley it was said that there would be 1,000 tailgate parking spaces in the sports fields to the northwest of the stadium. There will be an additional 5,000 underground parking places under the buildings to the south. Not nearly enough tailgating spots...and a total of 6000 spots for a stadium that sized is horrible. Plan on paying $100 to park...otherwise have fun waiting for our s#!++y trolley system to get you in/out. How large is Tailgate Park for Petco Park? |
|
|
|
Post by Spud on Dec 1, 2017 18:20:00 GMT -8
Not nearly enough tailgating spots...and a total of 6000 spots for a stadium that sized is horrible. Plan on paying $100 to park...otherwise have fun waiting for our s#!++y trolley system to get you in/out. How large is Tailgate Park for Petco Park? Who gives a $#!+ about Petco...I'm talking about college football game day experience. I've never seen tailgating at baseball games like football games. Sitting in a high priced restaurant waiting forever to get food/drinks is not the collegiate experience. |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Dec 1, 2017 18:22:27 GMT -8
In thhe presentation on SDSU Mission Valley it was said that there would be 1,000 tailgate parking spaces in the sports fields to the northwest of the stadium. There will be an additional 5,000 underground parking places under the buildings to the south. Not nearly enough tailgating spots...and a total of 6000 spots for a stadium that sized is horrible. Plan on paying $100 to park...otherwise have fun waiting for our s#!++y trolley system to get you in/out. Don't ever expect to see a 15,000 car parking lot again. Soccer City's parking wouldn't be any better I'm sure. Plenty of room to tailgate, just not next to your car, in the river park and around campus. If you have a solution, please share it with us. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Dec 1, 2017 18:26:47 GMT -8
How large is Tailgate Park for Petco Park? Who gives a $#!+ about Petco...I'm talking about college football game day experience. I've never seen tailgating at baseball games like football games. Sitting in a high priced restaurant waiting forever to get food/drinks is not the collegiate experience. Lighten up. It was a legitimate question. Tailgate Park also has 1,000 spaces. And no RV's allowed, which I assume would be the case at a new Aztec Stadium. It will be interesting how parking will be handled, but parking will definitely be at a premium. |
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Dec 1, 2017 20:17:51 GMT -8
Who gives a $#!+ about Petco...I'm talking about college football game day experience. I've never seen tailgating at baseball games like football games. Sitting in a high priced restaurant waiting forever to get food/drinks is not the collegiate experience. Lighten up. It was a legitimate question. Tailgate Park also has 1,000 spaces. And no RV's allowed, which I assume would be the case at a new Aztec Stadium. It will be interesting how parking will be handled, but parking will definitely be at a premium. I agree. Unfortunately, the "new thing" is commuting, public transportation, Uber, etc, so the days of big parking lots be are over. I see the positives and the negatives, but the fact remains, the big stadiums with large amounts of parking are dead. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsu2000 on Dec 1, 2017 20:57:11 GMT -8
Let's assume the development is built out in 15 years.
First 3 years we're playing at the Q. The whole southeast portion of the parking lot is available.
Assume the next 7 years we have the stadium plus a third of the site unbuilt with a graded pad for parking. So maybe in 10-15 years you might have to start worrying about parking.
In 15 years there will be 5,000 spaces underground, 1,000 spots for high end donors and another probably 2-3,000 available for game day on the rest of the site.
So start worrying about your parking 15 years from now. 15 years ago did anyone here think Uber was a possibility? Worry about getting enough votes to get the property first and don't worry about 15-20 years from now.
|
|
