|
|
Jimbo
 |
| 10/29/2007 10:42 PM |
 Alert
|
| Didn't the DRE already approve the report in question? |
|
|
|
|
Ana
|
| 10/30/2007 12:28 AM |
Alert
|
Mr. Baxter,
I apologize for making assumption. I hope that you will be able to help those in need. Please keep us posted. |
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
|
| 10/30/2007 1:08 AM |
Alert
|
The placement of the civil service facility doesn't seem like anything that is controllable by the developer. I recall when the women shelter went in on Cortez Hill the people at Discovery handled it well, I even think the developer may have donated money to the facillity. This is the honoralble thing to do. The facility on Cortez Hill hasn't been an issue, I used to live on the Hill and it's just wasn't a problem and was managed well by the staff there. The office building is probably a completely seperate entitity. Living with less well off people is a basic fact of life in the city.
Not sure at all about the problem with the ceilings, I checked out the condos and didn't notice anything. I actually thought it was a nicely done actually.
|
|
|
|
|
SC lookyloo
|
| 10/30/2007 7:15 AM |
Alert
|
| I saw the ceilings and asked the sales person about them (in all units I viewed). He acted like this had never been pointed out to him before, and he had no explanation for the ceiling patches. After skimming the long legal document, all I can say is "good grief." I hope the SC buyers win this thing. |
|
|
|
|
Soupalicious
|
| 10/30/2007 8:31 AM |
Alert
|
"Take a look at the Soupy Sales mags (above). Incredibly creative. It should definitely be published.
Joe"
Unfortunately, someone saw fit to delete my little Soupy Sales spoof. I thought it was fun and put some time into it, but apparently the moderators do not have a sense of humor.
|
|
|
|
|
Soupalicious
|
| 10/30/2007 8:31 AM |
Alert
|
"Take a look at the Soupy Sales mags (above). Incredibly creative. It should definitely be published.
Joe"
Unfortunately, someone saw fit to delete my little Soupy Sales spoof. I thought it was fun and put some time into it, but apparently the moderators do not have a sense of humor.
|
|
|
|
|
Jack
|
| 10/30/2007 9:23 AM |
Alert
|
"I recall when the women shelter went in on Cortez Hill the people at Discovery handled it well...."
Except for the sirens from the constant flow of ambulances and fire trucks that respond mostly to non-emergency calls. |
|
|
|
|
Downtown Bum
|
| 10/30/2007 9:50 AM |
Alert
|
| Can anybody tell me the opening date that the Soup Corner Kitchen will start serving hot bowls of soup?It is only a short walk from my new digs at Vagrant Pointe at 10th and Market and I am cold and hungry and I do not want to disturb the Baxters by knocking on there door by accident. |
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
|
| 10/30/2007 10:04 AM |
Alert
|
| I agree with the moderator. Those "soupy" pictures were overkill and detracted from the dicussion. |
|
|
|
|
Soupalicious
|
| 10/30/2007 1:48 PM |
Alert
|
Posted By n/a on 10/30/2007 10:04 AM
I agree with the moderator. Those "soupy" pictures were overkill and detracted from the dicussion.
Well, I thought they were funny. I don't believe that posts should be deleted unless they are overtly offensive or pornographic. I moderate a number of forums and generally less is more. Let people speak freely as they choose to. Moderation and censorship is what annoys people and makes the boards less lively, in my view.
Clearly, there is a time and place for moderation, but many of the homophobic comments have remained while Soupy Sales is axed. I strongly disagree with this. |
|
|
|
|
Soupalicious
|
| 10/30/2007 7:30 PM |
Alert
|
| Thank you, Joe. I don't quite understand it but c'est la vie.
By the way, I applaud you for your actions. I do understand that these developers operate a business and are here to make money, and to preserve their money where possible.
Nonetheless, it's clear that there are businesses who think it's okay to trample on the rights of their customers simply because they have more money. It certainly appears (to me) that the developers of Smart Corner are not playing by the rules and are not giving their customers a fair shake. Their actions are egregious and outrageous. Should a court agree that this is the case, I hope that they get what's coming to them. It will not only right a wrong, but will serve notice to other developers that actions along these lines will not be tolerated. |
|
|
|
|
anon
|
| 10/30/2007 9:38 PM |
Alert
|
| bring back the picks. |
|
|
|
|
Consumer Protector
|
| 10/31/2007 10:25 AM |
Alert
|
| Joe Baxter,
I commend you for what you are doing. It sounds like you are dealing with a real snake in the grass. As I am sure you know, Magic Johnson was an investor in this project. I wonder if he knows about this? He always seemed to be somewhat of a stand-up guy.
Did you write that DRE complaint yourself or did you have an attorney draft it?
Who will be representing you in your civil suit? |
|
|
|
|
You Should Know Better
|
| 10/31/2007 2:22 PM |
Alert
|
Joseph,
One day you might be old and frail and need the assistance of a social services facility for the elderly. I hope for your sake that they have not all be driven out of downtown by short-sighted people such as yourself.
What goes around comes around, my friend.
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
|
| 10/31/2007 2:48 PM |
Alert
|
Posted By n/a on 10/31/2007 2:22 PM
Joseph,
One day you might be old and frail and need the assistance of a social services facility for the elderly. I hope for your sake that they have not all be driven out of downtown by short-sighted people such as yourself.
What goes around comes around, my friend.
I don't see how this has anything to do with Smart Corner and Joe.
The elderly service facility is welcomed to stay. Nobody is telling them to move. Smart Corner needs to disclosed that fact to the buyers. Simple as that. The prices of the condos will reflect whether having that facility at Smart Corner is a negative or a positive.
|
|
|
|
|
E M Johnson
|
| 10/31/2007 10:59 PM |
Alert
|
| Please please don't sue. Let's talk about this over a hot bowl of soup. |
|
|
|
|
Frenchy
|
| 10/31/2007 11:30 PM |
Alert
|
"this building will never be considered "luxury" despite the recent advertizing."
The only thing that could ever be considered "luxury" about this building are the high prices. It was a disaster in the making from the beginning. |
|
|
|
|
Cowboy
|
| 11/01/2007 7:48 AM |
Alert
|
| Was there a threat of violence to get you to sign the 533 page document? You could have hurt the developer more if all the potential buyers would have walked away with their deposits on the units. Could you imagine a brand new building with zero sales? But I suppose that the only decent units for sale in all of San Diego is Soup Corner. Its going to be difficult and expensive to sue a developer with a government agency as a partner in the development. |
|
|
|
|
Bull
|
| 11/01/2007 9:29 AM |
Alert
|
Cowboy -
You obviously have no knowledge of downtown San Diego if you think "Soup Corner has the the only decent units for sale". Soup Corner is probably one of the least desirable among a dozen new buildings opening now and throughout the next year in downtown San Diego.
You also have very little common sense to think that it hurts the developer more to have current buyers walk away from their deposit. Although this is a sunk cost, less people will walk away from their deposits given the choice. If Soup Corner did not disclose material information that affects a buyers decision to purchase, as Mr. Baxter is alleging, then buyers under contract should have the right to their deposits back. It's pretty clear that Soup Corner did not disclose material information that they must have known. Giving buyers the right to their deposits, by economic common sense, would cause more buyers to walk away so that they can put that deposit into a more desirable building.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Joeseph Baxter
|
| 11/01/2007 10:23 AM |
Alert
|
| Anyone from the UT contact you? |
|
|
|
|