Logic and reason? What logic is there to your opposition of the stadium, besides the claim that it blocks out development of towers which NO ONE is lining up to build.

If the options were stadium vs. dense urban core, I'd be against a stadium. But the options that actually exist in the real world (not a fantasy skycraperforum) are stadium vs. decades of that awful bus yard. And whereas a stadium would probably spur development in the parcels around it, the bus yard actually discourages it.

If a stadium went in, the value and desirability of the parcels around it would shoot up. The desirability of being next to a bus yard and a homeless encampment.... zero.

To use your logic, why did Bosa build that sparkling new residential tower (The tallest downtown) right in the middle of the slum? PETCO is only 4 or so blocks away... Do we need a stadium every 4 blocks to spur development? Land downtown is so limited as it is.

I think it's about balance. A vibrant downtown in my opinion has a variety of different venues - live, work, civic, entertainment, cultural, sports, etc. As it is much of DT is geared more for destination entertainment than for live/work. That's why in my previous post I referred to the Gaslamp in an off-color manner, which I apologize if I offended people, but the Gaslamp and environs is geared towards tourists/people from other areas in the county coming to party/convention goers, not people who live DT. All of that is good, of course, because it generates revenue. But the question is do we want ALL of DT to be like that? Wouldn't DT be better as a heterogenous urban area than a monotonous area that basically has the same vibe in all parts of it? I though EV was going in a different direction with the IDEA district vision, but a football stadium and convention annex will just make EV "Gaslamp East" and would be disastrous for downtown, in my opinion. I'm not charmed by the rail yard either, but I'm also not a fan of development just to develop or of being in favor of something bad because I don't like what's there already. That's how mediocrity ensues. Look around PETCO now, there are still tons of vacant storefronts right next to it. Restaurants that aren't chains keep going out of business. How long did TR produce sit empty? Like a decade in a prime locale right across from PETCO Park. With so many for lease signs right next to PETCO, what makes you think building another major sports stadium a few blocks away will suddenly bring tremendous development?

I think you meant Pinnacle, not Bosa as the developer, if you're talking about the yellow high-rise tower on 15th and Island. I heard they are having trouble with homeless breaking into the garage and camping out in there and the red tower that is supposed to go next door has been delayed.

I also live in East Village and would love to see the Chargers Stadium go in my neighborhood. Stadiums have a shelf life (obviously - look at Qualcomm) of around 50 years. To me based on Petco Park, this stadium would be a great catalyst for development in that area. What is wrong with an entertainment district to attract people to East Village and downtown? I completely agree that we need more higher paying jobs such as tech, but there are plans for that with the IDEA district and hopefully Makers Quarters to do just exactly that. So many people say there is a lack of space downtown (completely agree with that), but a stadium that takes up space on a few parcels of land that has no plans for development in the near future does not upset me. What does upset me though are all the 5-6 story rental buildings being developed on full city blocks and on main corridors (10th-15th on Market) of our city. Now that is not the best way to develop our city for the future. New buildings should be taller and mid-rise buildings should be a thing of the past. These stumpy looking buildings will be standing long after a downtown, East Village Chargers Stadium would be.

Who knows, maybe after 50-60 years, the airport will be relocated and the next new stadium could be built over there, creating more development in that part of town (I know pipe dream, but why not dream?!?)

RE: the homeless. Development doesn't make homeless people disappear, it pushes them to other areas. San Diego needs a comprehensive, permanent solution to the homeless problem that involves permanent shelters equipped with dependence abuse, mental health, and job counseling. I get very irritated when people link development to somehow solving the homeless problem. These are two entirely different issues, building condos or a stadium, etc doesn't make homeless people go away. I guess for a lot of people as long as they don't have to see homeless people that means they don't exist. I don't subscribe to that line of thinking.

JMI owns the land we're talking about aside from the bus yard. It's their idea to build a combined NFL stadium/convention annex. If that doesn't happen maybe they MLS stadium?

Any talk of their current parking lot being developed into some type of office building complex, high tech hub or education campus is dreaming. JMI will build what they want there and it isn't any of those things.

If not a stadium of some sort it'll be hotels and condos. Bank on it.

Oh aero, we've gone over this before and you've been clearly wrong every time. So, my response is the same as it's always been. Feel free to read back if you need a refresher. :cheers:

Note: we are likely heading into an economic malaise and/or recession, from what I hear the tower is being delayed not because of the location (it's 60% leased and going strong) but because they've taken note of the economic forecast.

And dream all you want about Lindberg :cool: It ain't happening.

I understand where you're coming from. It's interesting that Civic San Diego (the development approval agency) has to my knowledge, NEVER refused a project. You can't really fault them, however. They can only approve what developers bring to the table, which happens to be the stumpies we all love to hate. Anything over 6 stories needs steel frame construction, which is only economical if you go to a minimum of 20 or so stories. The tall ones only get build around 'destination attractions' because we lack the strong jobs market downtown. This is the reality I've come to face, and hopefully the trend of companies moving back downtown will drive demand. People need to be able to afford living down here, after all.

Does the area around Petco require retail on every street? If a lot of it is vacant, maybe they're building too much retail.

It works that way in Seattle too. Neighborhoods that concentrate retail on one street do fine. But ones that require it on every street never get any retail critical mass in one place, and we get crappy retail dotted with vacancies. That's how Belltown works.

The East Village sounds similar to our Pioneer Square area. Football, soccer, and baseball collectively dominate the area. I'm fans of all of them, but it's a tradeoff. Not so much chains (the area has been too gritty for most of those) but game crowds tend to dominate, and some businesses do a lot worse on game days because people are afraid of the crowds and/or parking.

It's looked favorably upon. "Mixed use" developments get special bonuses, of which included retail space is one. Certain blocks require a certain number of points to qualify for approval. The underlying issue underneath a lot of these stumpy developments is that they do not maximize the amount of points designated for that particular zone. That's my rough understanding of it, anyway. Maybe someone can put it in better terms.

San Diego, mis amigos, needs a diversified economy! COMICON and the NFL are part go this! Whether or not you like Marvel Movies or the Chargers, you need to recognize they are part of the future of SD, and that we need to do whatever it takes to keep this city's economy progressing; therefore A downtown NFl , and most likely MLS stadium, combined with convention space for COMICON is good for SD, therefore I am for it.

Yes, one tower has been built, but not on the piece of land we are talking about (the bus yard.)

And if there were a stadium under construction on that bus lot, there wouldn't just be ONE tower in EV, there would be several.

Actually, I have been right. No one has made any realistic proposal for the site other than a stadium, and I am confident that will continue to be the case for years. Which is what I have always said.

When some huge development company steps in, buys the whole lot, and builds a nice mixed use neighborhood, I will happily admit I was wrong (because I would prefer real development to a stadium.) But, unlike you I live in the real world and realize that isn't going to happen.

So far, the bus yard has remained in the same state I've predicted since 2011.

You're right but you missed a part in your second paragraph that makes something like a stadium the only realistic option for the site. That being that in addition to someone coming in with a plan to redevelop the entire bus yard parcel the plan also needs to include the relocation of the bus yard itself. After all, it's not like the bus yard isn't in use or in need.

The only way that parcel gets redeveloped is with some form of a public/private partnership. It's the only way the MTS is going to leave. It's the only way they can leave as they would need a new home.

Looks like they've started building the crane for IDEA 1.

They're moving quickly on this. Much faster than Park and C, who in almost 2 years since closing down the businesses on site have only managed to dig a hole.

If I remember correctly Park and C ran into something during excavation that required an archaeological study.

1919 Pacific Highway:
http://timesofsandiego.com/business/...ampaign=buffer
http://jexh1kujdl2rjoqlfrvego6i.wpen...ic-Highway.jpg