San Diego State University unveiled a redevelopment plan Tuesday to buy the city’s Qualcomm Stadium site and turn it into an academic village with housing, research facilities, parks, a hotel and commercial space plus a new Aztec stadium of 35,000 to 40,000 seats.

The two-page outline was attached to a letter to Mayor Kevin Faulconer and the City Council. It also figured into council debate on whether to declare Qualcomm surplus property and pursue an alternative to the SoccerCity ballot initiative headed toward a citywide ballot next year.

Much like the SoccerCity proposal by La Jolla-based FS Investors, the SDSU plan would result in a “mixed-use development of medium density that is transit oriented.” The $4 billion, privately financed plan by FS proposes 4,800 housing units, 3.1 million square feet of commercial space, two hotels and 56 acres of parkland plus a professional soccer stadium of 22,000 seats.

Campus spokeswoman Gina Jacobs, who addressed the council, said after the meeting that details will come later and that no private developer is in partnership with the university, although public-private partnerships would be formed to carry out the plan if it is adopted.


“We stand ready and willing to lead this effort in partnership with the city of San Diego in order to best address both SDSU’s needs and the city’s objectives,” she told the council.

She also said the university has reopened discussions within the last two weeks with Faulconer’s office now that he has a new chief of staff.

SoccerCity spokesman Nick Stone said it was “gratifying” that SDSU and his group’s plan were “so incredibly closely aligned.” But he said the FS plan requires no taxpayer spending and can be financed and carried out immediately if voters approve it.

“We’d welcome a re-opening of dialogue with SDSU on how we can deliver to San Diego what appears to be largely a shared vision for the Qualcomm site,” Stone said.


One of the key issues under discussion between the city and university is extending the Aztecs’ football contract at Qualcomm for two years through the 2020 season.

“Finding a solution for SDSU’s future needs remains an important part of any discussion related to the stadium site,” said mayoral spokesman Craig Gustafson.

The council discussion came a day after SoccerCity’s sponsors asked Major League Soccer to delay awarding two final franchises for expansion teams until the city votes. MLS plans to award two franchises this year but has not yet said when it will award two more.

The council debated what it could do to make the land available to SDSU in light of the SoccerCity initiative and decided to send the matter to Councilman Scott Sherman’s smart growth and land use committee. He voted against the motion but is required to schedule committee discussion within the next four months.


The SDSU and SoccerCity plans resemble one another. Both are sports-related, offer housing and commercial uses and turn the Qualcomm parking lot into a revenue producer for the city.

Both would replace 50-year-old Qualcomm with a new stadium that could be shared with other sports. However, SoccerCity’s plan to expand to accommodate the Aztecs has been rejected by SDSU as too expensive. SDSU says its stadium could be expanded for the NFL.

SoccerCity proposes to buy up to 80 acres of the Qualcomm site and lease the rest. Tom McCarron, SDSU’s chief financial officer, said in the three-page letter that the city could sell the land to the university and declare that “some or all of the land is required for public purposes such as higher education.”

That approach would presumably sidestep the state surplus land act that requires such land be first offered for affordable housing.


The key points in the “SDSU Vision for Mission Valley” position paper include:

Stadium: The “multiuse stadium” could be expanded for a “potential NFL partner.” It would have “adjacent and convenient parking” and offer a design that “provides an intimate fan experience, premium seating, access to technology, community gathering areas, recreation fields and local foods and beverages.”

The “multiuse stadium” could be expanded for a “potential NFL partner.” It would have “adjacent and convenient parking” and offer a design that “provides an intimate fan experience, premium seating, access to technology, community gathering areas, recreation fields and local foods and beverages.” River Park: Just as SoccerCity has proposed, SDSU would include a park along the San Diego River “for recreational and potential educational uses with green space and walking paths.”

Just as SoccerCity has proposed, SDSU would include a park along the San Diego River “for recreational and potential educational uses with green space and walking paths.” Affordable and market-rate housing: SDSU would focus its housing on upper-division and graduate students, faculty and staff. “Over time, additional units may support general housing demand.”

SDSU would focus its housing on upper-division and graduate students, faculty and staff. “Over time, additional units may support general housing demand.” Commercial and office use: Outside builders would develop space for commercial tenants “and over time ownership/occupancy will revert to SDSU for educational and workforce training to benefit the region in perpetuity.” University functions could include research and faculty office space, “interdisciplinary academic teams studying climate and sustainability, water scarcity and other critical topics.”

Outside builders would develop space for commercial tenants “and over time ownership/occupancy will revert to SDSU for educational and workforce training to benefit the region in perpetuity.” University functions could include research and faculty office space, “interdisciplinary academic teams studying climate and sustainability, water scarcity and other critical topics.” Complementary retail: Restaurants and retail spaces would serve residents and businesses, while, like SoccerCity, “creating an exciting college game-day experience” for teams using the new stadium.

Restaurants and retail spaces would serve residents and businesses, while, like SoccerCity, “creating an exciting college game-day experience” for teams using the new stadium. Hotel: Besides hosting campus visitors and supporting stadium-related events, the hotel would serve as a “professional incubator” for students at SDSU’s school of hospitality and tourism managment.

The plan did not say how SDSU would finance the development or estimate how much it would cost.

Former City Manager Jack McGrory, who sits on the university’s Campanile Foundation support board and has been advising SDSU on various development options, said many of the aspects in SoccerCity would be the same in the SDSU plan.

The river park would cover 50 to 60 acres and the number of housing units might be about the same. The city would earn property taxes from much of the development that is not strictly educational. And the university would pay fair market value for the land it buys or leases from the city; the latest appraisal set the value at $82 million for the Qualcomm land.


However, the key differences, according to McGrory, are that much less office and retail would be built and the university would not buy the Murphy Canyon site, which he said the city should sell to help retire more than $30 million in remaining Qualcomm Stadium debt.

He said many of the details are being worked out by SDSU planners, and outside developers might be brought into the process later. He said a more detailed plan is likely to be ready for public discussion by the end of the year.


Business

roger.showley@sduniontribune.com; (619) 293-1286; Twitter: @rogershowley