SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2

[Nerv]

Thanks for the info. Dales5050.

So the Carson stadium actually would take nearly 20 years to get paid off meaning both teams wouldn't be seeing that revenue as profit until the debt is paid off.

You could argue the fact that being called a Los Angeles team will make you more money but since the Rams and the Raiders left for greener pastures in the past you could also argue that the city hasn't been kind to NFL teams in the past since both played in and won Superbowls and yet both still departed for better opportunities.

I also question what will become of this deal between the Chargers and Raiders if the rumours about the Rams returning to LA happen first. Three Los Angeles teams?

I'd rather the Chargers stay in San Diego but I have to admit a interest in seeing how the fallout of losing San Diego states football program and the two bowl games played here annually along with the Chargers would play in the city. That and how many years Qualcomm would sit falling apart as the city would fight over what to do with the now vacant stadium.

[embora]

I'm still trying to figure out in my mind whether to believe the Carson proposal is a legitimate threat, or if it is merely a bluff.

If it is real, what would happen to the project if one of the teams decides to stay in their current city, and the other still wants to move? Does it mean the deal falls through? If that is a possibility, it strikes me as a pretty risky plan for either team to consider. And that is before you factor in the possibility that the Rams could beat both teams to L.A., making me wonder how the metro area that couldn't hold two teams could support three of them.

In judging the genuineness of the Carson proposal, It would also be informative to know more about what alternatives are available to the Raiders. Though I am ignorant on that topic.

Until I see more info, I'll figure that its a bluff to motivate local elected officials (who don't want to look like they didn't try to keep the team in town) with a sense of urgency.

[Northparkwizard]

Drove by the Carson site on my way up to Big Sur earlier this week. The property location and neighborhood isn't even in the same universe as the Mission Valley site. I honestly feel bad for any athlete that should ever have to compete outdoors and downwind of petroleum refineries.

[mello]

Guys I have researched and look at this stadium/relocation issue from every angle and here are the two possibilities for the Chargers:

1. Work with the County/City and hop on board with SDSU and play your part in the major opportunity to redevelop the MV site. Spanos is already a developer he can make this a big revenue producer for himself. Bringing in an MLS team will also boost the naming rights deal and I think Kia would pay 15 - 20 million a year to name the Stadium "Kia Field". Hell they can even name the SDSU Campus west Kia something lol.

2. Go be a tenant in Stan Kroenke's facility he will build in Inglewood. He will probably charge you 30 to 40 million per year in rent because he will be building the whole stadium with his own money he is worth 12 billion (combined with wife) and can do everything himself. If SD keeps lagging and nothing can get done here and it pencils out to go be Kroenke's bitch tenant then Spanos may do that but that is a big blow to a rich man's ego.

Those really are the only two options Carson is a smoke screen, the Chargers are not the 49ers they won't get that lucrative of a PSL deal in LA. The Raiders are a bigger draw in that area anyway. Spanos is not that rich and can't come up with more than 200 million of his own money to put towards a facility maybe 300 mill max to share one in LA. Keep in mind the Raiders have Zero cash to put towards a stadium Mark Davis has no capital at all, his entire fortune is locked up in the value of Raiders franchise.

[dales5050]

Originally Posted by Nerv

So the Carson stadium actually would take nearly 20 years to get paid off meaning both teams wouldn't be seeing that revenue as profit until the debt is paid off.]

It would take less than that. The 2 sources of revenue I outlined are just some of the ways the stadium would bring in revenue. I would say it's paid off in 10-12 years.



Should also add that while this may bit San Diego, I think after LA gets a team or teams..the public funding of stadiums is going to end. Just where will teams threaten to go? That's why you have 3 teams wanting in on LA. It's the last play in the game before it changes.

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by mello

Guys I have researched and look at this stadium/relocation issue from every angle and here are the two possibilities for the Chargers:

1. Work with the County/City and hop on board with SDSU and play your part in the major opportunity to redevelop the MV site. Spanos is already a developer he can make this a big revenue producer for himself. Bringing in an MLS team will also boost the naming rights deal and I think Kia would pay 15 - 20 million a year to name the Stadium "Kia Field". Hell they can even name the SDSU Campus west Kia something lol.

2. Go be a tenant in Stan Kroenke's facility he will build in Inglewood. He will probably charge you 30 to 40 million per year in rent because he will be building the whole stadium with his own money he is worth 12 billion (combined with wife) and can do everything himself. If SD keeps lagging and nothing can get done here and it pencils out to go be Kroenke's bitch tenant then Spanos may do that but that is a big blow to a rich man's ego.

Those really are the only two options Carson is a smoke screen, the Chargers are not the 49ers they won't get that lucrative of a PSL deal in LA. The Raiders are a bigger draw in that area anyway. Spanos is not that rich and can't come up with more than 200 million of his own money to put towards a facility maybe 300 mill max to share one in LA. Keep in mind the Raiders have Zero cash to put towards a stadium Mark Davis has no capital at all, his entire fortune is locked up in the value of Raiders franchise.

Questions/comments about the two scenarios you describe:

Scenario 1: would this still require a public vote / public money? I think it could work if it doesn't but if it does I just don't see SD voters supporting it.

Scenario 2: from what I've read in the LA press, the inglewood location, if it moves to reality, would most likely favor the Rams. Ram's owner Kroenke is part of the Hollywood Park Land Co. development group that is promoting the project, why would he do that if not to relocate his own team there?

Comment in general about a stadium vote in SD: when would the vote be? Would it need to be before the 2016 general election? This makes a HUGE difference. The general election attracts a broader spectrum of voters including younger/more progressive people who I think would be more likely to vote yes. A special off-year election heavily favors older conservative voters who want NO tax increases or perceived tax increases using public funds for ANYTHING. I don't see any stadium proposal that needs an election being successful unless it's during the 2016 presidential election.

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by embora

I'm still trying to figure out in my mind whether to believe the Carson proposal is a legitimate threat, or if it is merely a bluff.

If it is real, what would happen to the project if one of the teams decides to stay in their current city, and the other still wants to move? Does it mean the deal falls through? If that is a possibility, it strikes me as a pretty risky plan for either team to consider. And that is before you factor in the possibility that the Rams could beat both teams to L.A., making me wonder how the metro area that couldn't hold two teams could support three of them.

In judging the genuineness of the Carson proposal, It would also be informative to know more about what alternatives are available to the Raiders. Though I am ignorant on that topic.

Until I see more info, I'll figure that its a bluff to motivate local elected officials (who don't want to look like they didn't try to keep the team in town) with a sense of urgency.

I'm skeptical of this dual team plan as well. Maybe they are "spreading the risk" by using Carson as a threat assuming at least one city - SD or Oakland - will come up with a stadium plan and if one doesn't they can look to Carson. It just seems odd that with the inglewood plan they could be planning the dual team stadium in Carson. That could potentially bring 3 NFL teams to LA!!??!!??

[mello]

SDCAL: Maybe I should of clarified but of course I was referring to Spanos deciding to go up and share Kroenke's Inglewood stadium with the Rams. IMO the perfect team to do that is the Raiders because they can probably draw significant PSL revenue that would offset the very high rent Kroenke is going to charge either SD/OAK to play in his palace that he is spending well over 1.4 billion on (including land costs).

Plus remember he has already put in about 900 million to be the sole owner of the Rams so he has already spent waaaay more money than Spanos has or ever will. He isn't just going to let them come be a tenant on the cheap by any means.

Regarding a public vote I think the Stadium Task Force and all players involve realize it isn't a good idea so if they involve the County and SDSU basically going in on a partnership with Spanos to maximize all of that prime land maybe there is a way it can pencil out without needing to vote on a County loan or Joint Powers Authority.

Remember Spanos also has a partner in Colony Capital Group out of Santa Monica. These are all smart people and I think there can be some way to get this done and not need a vote. Do you guys know how much students at SDSU pay for BLVD 63 and other nice places that are convenient to campus? The pay through the nose! There is a ton of money to be made in partnering with SDSU to build housing for young people. Plus the leases on at least 500k square feet of office/classroom space.

[Leo the Dog]

NFL in LA: Study Claims Inglewood Stadium Site Would Pose Terrorism Risk

In a 14-page report, Ridge suggests that because the Inglewood stadium proposed by St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke would lie within three to four miles of Los Angeles International Airport and beneath the flight path of airliners, terrorists might try to shoot down a plane or crash one into the stadium, scenarios Ridge described as "a terrorist event 'twofer.' "

Ridge said the Inglewood stadium, part of a planned retail, office and residential development at the now-defunct Hollywood Park, would have "a significant risk profile with the potential to produce consequences that will not only the impact the airport and region, but global interest

Source:http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...rrorism-threat


Tempe lost the Cardinals Stadium (best location with LRT) because of its proximity to Sky Harbor Airport. The FAA strongly opposed it and therefore was built 25 miles west in Glendale.

[spoonman]

Petco is even closer to an airport. I can't see this actually killing this project.

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by spoonman

Petco is even closer to an airport. I can't see this actually killing this project.

It killed Tempe's stadium site. The site still sits empty to this day. ESPN had a story on this also.

I'm sure Coronado NAS is a deterrent, and the physical geography of SD and the DT high rises are in stark contrast to low lying Inglewood.

Look at Google maps. The Inglewood site lies in the final approach of two runways of LAX, similar to Tempe.

Definitely a possibility.

[Leo the Dog]

KUSI news reporting that El Cajon might offer an option for the Chargers. There is county owned land near Gillepsie Field that is available. Access to the trolley and major freeways.

[aerogt3]

Originally Posted by spoonman

Petco is even closer to an airport. I can't see this actually killing this project.

Petco broke ground before 9/11.....

[HurricaneHugo]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

KUSI news reporting that El Cajon might offer an option for the Chargers. There is county owned land near Gillepsie Field that is available. Access to the trolley and major freeways.

http://www.kusi.com/story/28228240/p...way-used-to-be

Sell the mission valley site to SDSU and give this land to the Chargers.

Maybe sell the Sports Arena site too

[Derek]

Originally Posted by spoonman

Petco is even closer to an airport. I can't see this actually killing this project.

I don't get it either. Citi Field is directly under the flight path to LaGuardia.

[tyleraf]

22 story tower planned for former Library Tower site. http://www.civicsd.com/images/storie...s_2_3.2.15.pdf

[spoonman]

Lame. This same group was remanded recently for proposing another project that had lower than desired density. This lot was originally slated for 40 stories...oh well

[Puzzlecraft]

A LOT of activity nearby in Banker's Hill. Took some photos of five projects on Feb 25 and again today.

1) The Vue on Fifth. Fifth & Nutmeg. Lot of activity here. Already been two big pours, pretty soon will be at ground level. Will be 7 floors, 45 luxury condos. First picture taken Feb 25, second March 2


2) Regent on 5th. Fifth & Maple. The lot at the old Mandarin restaurant has been cleared of equipment, but the building remains on site, abandoned. New building is to be 10 floors, I think more condos, with some retail space on the ground level. Pictures taken Feb 25.


3) The Park Bankers Hill. 2850 Sixth. The ugly Sixth Avenue Medical Center is finally being torn down! This will be a major project, 13 storys and very high end condo, starting @$1.5 million. Will be some store fronts on fifth. Pictures taken March 2.


4) Fifth and Palm. Stalled, but maybe will break ground this year. Evolution, Sanfilippo’s, Extraordinary Desserts and a hair salon would be nuked. Read that there will be two towers, on of them a hotel the other apartments. Would be some retail. Pictures Feb 25.


5) Fourth Avenue Lofts. Fourth & Olive. Initial excavation is done, about to start the pilings. Pictures taken Feb 25.


Hot hot hot!

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by spoonman

Lame. This same group was remanded recently for proposing another project that had lower than desired density. This lot was originally slated for 40 stories...oh well

Agreed. Library Tower and Cosmopolitan Square are the biggest disappointments in east village (disappointments because both never broke ground and were replaced with shorter, inferior projects).

[SDCAL]

Originally Posted by Puzzlecraft

A LOT of activity nearby in Banker's Hill. Took some photos of five projects on Feb 25 and again today.

2) Regent on 5th. Fifth & Maple. The lot at the old Mandarin restaurant has been cleared of equipment, but the building remains on site, abandoned. New building is to be 10 floors, I think more condos, with some retail space on the ground level. Pictures taken Feb 25.


Hot hot hot!

Would it be in really poor taste to admit I kinda hope they find a way to incorporate the old mandarin house into the new project? It was so old school in a good way, the best place for Americanized Chinese food.