New stadium in LA

[Faded blues]

Cause it's cheap

[bonehead]

Cause it's cheap

....and Spanos and Davis needed a big piece of land in the LA area to use as part of their bluff.......once the buffoon from the State mentioned they were going to install a "high density plastic" over the ground before the stadium was built I knew this whole thing was a joke.

[6025]

What are we missing on the toxic waste dump of Carson? How would the EPA, the NFL, civil engineers, local government, etc., allow a billon dollar stadium (that requires millions just to make it usable and will then require a continual/constant effort to de-contaminate for the health and safety of thousands of people) to be built? Why would two different billion dollar franchises run the risk of the environmental and PR nightmare while trying to re-brand and re-establish a new identity? How is this even an option?

Is it not as bad as reported? Is the pollution issue completely solvable? I understand the controversy over the potential move but why this site? This toxic waste of a site?

It's a bluff and the NFL is complicit in this bluff game.

"THEY" (whoever "THEY" are) have deemed the land "safe" even though permanent ventilation of the ground will be required. I can't see them actually building a stadium on that. If they do then they're morons.

[Faded blues]

Nothing will be built on that site for decades. Not even a park. You can't build on a toxic dump.

It's why qualcomm was dead in 2004. Mte.

There are portions of qualcomm that sit on oil.

Freaking carson is a dump site.

Can you see a developer buying the santee dump and trying to build homes there?

[6025]

Nothing will be built on that site for decades. Not even a park. You can't build on a toxic dump.

It's why qualcomm was dead in 2004. Mte.

There are portions of qualcomm that sit on oil.

Freaking carson is a dump site.

Can you see a developer buying the santee dump and trying to build homes there?

How are they supposed to build on the Qualcomm site then?

[bonehead]

Can you see a developer buying the santee dump and trying to build homes there?

Yes, yes I can.....

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

Encanitas Ranch ring any bells? Landfill...

Like I said, I guess Spanos couldn't find an old Indian berrial ground to build on...

[Faded blues]

How are they supposed to build on the Qualcomm site then?

Cause in order to build on an me site you need to wait 20 years after the oil was cleaned up. After 2014 the qualcomm site is deemed safe for construction. As harmful oil is to humans, a landfill is like bathing in uranium 238.

[TTK]

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Qualcomm-Stadium-Site-Burdened-by-Legal-Issues-295282231.html

Qualcomm Stadium Site Burdened by Legal Issues

[6025]

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loca...295282231.html

Qualcomm Stadium Site Burdened by Legal Issues

As the civic focus on a new stadium site seems to be shifting toward Mission Valley, NBC 7 has learned of some troubling issues involving the current Qualcomm stadium location.

It seems the city got some bad advice as to the property's value several years ago.

As a result, the remedies aimed at addressing the legal flaws and dealing with the city’s quest for a new stadium could be complex and costly.
It all starts with the little-known fact that nearly half oft he 166-acre site -- and most of the land under the stadium itself -- is owned by the city of San Diego's Water Utilities Department.

Under the asphalt is an aquifer that could yield potable water.

For decades, the city leased the 80 acres owned by the department for $15,000 a year in rent.

But payments stopped in 2005 when the lease expired, and a later appraisal -- since discredited -- put the fair market rent at "zero" dollars, on grounds that the money-losing operation of the facility gave the department no return on investment.

"It's illegal, flat-out illegal," said City Attorney Jan Goldsmith.

Long story short: Goldsmith said the private appraisal in 2007 failed to consider the department, funded by water ratepayers, to be the city’s landlord as opposed to a business partner.
In an interview Thursday, Goldsmith noted that the city has paid $150,000 to the water fund as a good-faith deposit on recalculated back rent that will be due, plus further lease payments going forward.

In an interview Thursday, Goldsmith noted that the city has paid $150,000 to the water fund as a good-faith deposit on recalculated back rent that will be due, plus further lease payments going forward.

Those amounts, according to the city attorney, will be determined through “arms-length” negotiations based on a new appraisal of the property's fair market value -- a benchmark that could seriously escalate the cost of whatever's built.

A leading real estate economist consulted by NBC 7 pegs the fair-market value of the entire site at about $300 million.

By simple math, the water fund's portion would appear to be worth just under half that amount.

So, how do the “parties in interest” square up things for a new stadium project?

"Perhaps the water fund could retain the water rights under Qualcomm, but then get other compensation by having a land exchange for something else owned by the city,” Goldsmith explained. “But you'd better make sure these appraisals are honest and make sure there's an arms-length transaction. Another option is the buy the 80 acres from the water fund."

Either way, the Chargers are resolute in their preference for a hybrid stadium/convention facility on a 12-acre site in downtown’s East Village, not far from Petco Park and the city’s quarter-century-old Convention Center for which another expansion is being sought.

Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani told NBC 7 in a telephone interview Thursday that the legal and financial complications surrounding the Mission Valley location wouldn't have been such a concern for the team a decade ago.

But given rising land and building costs, Fabiani continued, the current Qualcomm Stadium site is now a much more expensive proposition: “To use a water board analogy, everything ripples out from there.”

Goldsmith expressed optimism that the snarls can be worked out.

But he offered these cautionary notes: "Chargers fans, if you want to put a stadium on the Qualcomm site, we've got to treat the water fund fairly, because the water fund is different from the taxpayers.

“And that's OK, we knew that. And the Chargers know that. So is it more of an impediment? No. It underscores, however, that you don't take the whole property and 'Let's use it! And tomorrow we start building a new stadium!' Wait a second,” Goldsmith counseled. “There's something you've still got to do."

Nice for wig-head to bring this up now. Throws a monkey wrench in the site. Maybe they should explore the waterfront by the convention center plan we saw yesterday.

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

Look at the hands out for money....

[Faded blues]

It's no biggie. It's the water utility.