Mission Valley, Downtown eyed for new Charger stadium

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

SAN DIEGO - A new Charger’s stadium is still a long way away, but if its built, there are likely two possible locations including moving the stadium downtown or keeping it in Mission Valley.

“We will have a real plan to consider for San Diego’s team,” said Mayor Kevin Faulconer during his State of the City address speech last Wednesday. “This is San Diegos team and San Diegans will have a final say by a public vote.”

Faulconer plans to hire a group of “civic leaders” to weigh both options and come up with a funding plan by fall.

One option up for consideration is the idea to bring the new arena to downtown as an extension to the Convention Center.

“The water, the restaurants, the beautiful sites and that’s always a draw,” said Real Estate Broker Melissa Cizauskas.

Pros include easy access to hotels, Lindbergh field and the trolley station, but the cons could outweigh the positives according to Cizauskas.

For starters Cizauskas explained that downtown isn’t best for tailgating events and lacks parking options.

“I think if you pull it east from the downtown location it will draw more industry to the east part of the county,” said Cizauskas who believes Mission Valley has more potential for growth. “And that’s great for business overall. New condos like they have downtown with Petco Park ... its done well for the Padres and moving east will generate more income for business owners and stimulate the economy with restaurants, hotels and create new development for new homeowners.”

Cons for Mission Valley also include limited bars and restaurants, traffic on Friars road as well as congestion with the building of a new stadium.

The plan to replace the 47-year-old stadium came in 2002 with then Mayor Dick Murphy.


  • Shawn

    I don’t get it. How many companies own the building they run their business out of? If the tenant is paying rent how is that welfare? Then if the same company contributes to building the office space and then still pays rent is that welfare? And when the tenant isn’t home you rent their space out to someone else. And then what the heck your tenant starts the largest blood drive in America and spends the day shopping with under privileged children or handing out Turkey’s at Thanksgiving. The company I work for just had a brand new building built for us and we signed a 20 year lease. We didn’t spend a penny building it. That’s how it works. What is with the hostilities? This article just showed that if you give politicians 3 million a year they will spend 5 million. Your argument is I would rather place the money in the hands of the politicians, how has that worked out so far? At least with a new facility you will have something to show for your money. Plus all the development that goes with it. Let them work out a plan and if it doesn’t work then vote it down. Saying no before you hear any details is just ignorant.

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.