BearSD said:
sp4149 said:
Hmmn, 7 more years of the Holiday Bowl, now to find a stadium, or build a new one.
They won't be without a stadium. The effect of SDSU winning their vote to acquire the stadium site from the city of San Diego is that the current stadium will remain standing indefinitely. SDSU and the city are haggling over the price, which was left to be negotiated by the referendum.
Even after they agree on a price and finalize the deal -- maybe at the end of 2019 -- that just means that SDSU can take however long they want to raise (or, more likely, borrow) the money to build a new stadium and then to build it. Expect 2.5 to 3 years from the time SDSU officially approves funding until the stadium is ready for football. Let's guess funding approved in mid-2020, stadium opens in fall 2023.
I wonder about the bowl game itself. Their sponsorships already shrunk to the point that they had to discontinue their second bowl game, the Poinsettia Bowl. They lost ESPN, and the Holiday Bowl is now marooned on FS1. Guess we'll have to wait and see whether the Holiday Bowl survives in San Diego through the 2026 game.
SDSU announced on Thursday announced it had awarded a $250 million contract to Clark Construction for building a new stadium at the SDCCU Stadium site, which a November referendum authorized the city to sell to SDSU.
San Diego State selected Clark Construction to design and build a 35,000 seat stadium as part of its Mission Valley expansion, according to a Feb. 28 announcement.
March 2, 2019
Cutting the stadium seating in half could make the venue sort of like Stanford light. The major difference is that lack of parking at the new stadium site. Qualcomm had ample parking next to the stadium, traffic getting to and from the two nearby freeways was the main complaint. Remove all the parking; the existing transit system is not being expanded to make up the difference. SDSU will not comment on issues like this which will/should be part of the EIR.
Problem is that SDSU is issuing contracts before they are close to finalizing the transfer from the city.
City council and others want to know who will pay for the demolition of the old stadium, SDSU has been reluctant to provide detailed cost information. And the EIR is still being prepared and could expand the project cost. The city is desperate to get rid of the property and probably willing to make a bad deal. Concerned elected officials and concerned citizens appear willing to file discovery lawsuits to reveal how much SDSU will pay and how they will get the funds. Verbage of the referendum appeared to require demolition of the old stadium upon completion of the new stadium. However maintenance and operation of the old stadium is subject to continued negotiations. The stadium can remain standing, even if inoperable or condemned, but that doesn't mean it has to host the Holiday Bowl. That will be subject to negotiations with SDSU which made some election promises that may be difficult to keep.
