North Park Jack in the Box rebuild permit has yet to pop up

@Cory Wixom, Newsflash! What you believe has no bearing on the truth. Read Dorian's article again and focus on the part about city laws including 'prohibitions against demolishing any exterior walls, increasing the footprint of the building, or undertaking any renovation that cost greater than 50 percent of the existing restaurant’s value.' Jack in the Box violated all three, there is undeniable proof of this, Repeatedly making nonsensical statements that nothing was changed, and the structure looks exactly the same as before does not automatically make them true. Read the lawsuit, it contains the evidence-- except for that pesky original permit, which the city won't provide. Why? Because a permit issued on the date claimed, allowing the scope of work that was performed doesn't exist. And that opens the door for our lawsuit, whether or not you agree with it, and whether or not you like the attorney handling it. And although it's evident you dislike Cory Briggs, but stop and think logically about your statements: " Cory Briggs driving the's BS and he's gonna do his best to suck the city dry", "con man Briggs", "a scam artist that says he's trying to help people but costs the city millions of dollars", and best if all: "Cory Briggs cost the city millions for OTHER lawsuits. He makes a living out of it." Hate him if you want to, but the lawsuits he wins against the city (and he doesn't win them all) is quite simply because the city is wrong. If the city doesn't like being "sucked dry", then how about they stop setting themselves up for it? I usually don't continue trying to make somebody see the logic or truth in something when it's obvious they've dug their heels in the sand and won't consider anything other than their set in stone beliefs. I'm afraid I've exceeded that limit here. Believe what you want, I'm done sparring with you.
— February 18, 2017 5:10 a.m.

North Park Jack in the Box rebuild permit has yet to pop up

@ Cory Wixom: If you truly live "right next to" Jack in the Box, as you state and have "been going there for 25 years", yet contend it "literally looks exactly the same as before", it's hard to imagine how you missed the demolition and construction of the new restaurant. Simply compare the photographs included in Dorian's article - sorry, but you can't just simply paint a second story level to the elevation. Perhaps you were out of town during the months long construction, and missed the photographs of the site documenting the old building completely torn down? Cory Briggs is not "driving the lawsuit", residents are. And what "costs the city millions of dollars" is the city itself by not obeying its own laws. Briggs wins lawsuits, the city pays for breaking the law. Not sure how that makes him a con artist...? All the city has to do is start following its own laws, they don't get to pick and choose which laws to follow nor who they allow to bend or ignore those laws. A level playing field for all. What a concept! With that, Briggs wouldn't have those lawsuits to file, and those millions could be used to fill all those 'Dean Spanos triggered potholes'. @AlexClarke: The idea of requiring JIB to tear down the structure is enticing, and although there's a faction who would like to see Jack gone altogether, the lawsuit's focus is the drive through, in violation of city zoning laws. Stay if you want, Jack, this was never about your restaurant. Make it a walk-up window, a ride-your-bike-up window, whatever, just get rid of the illegal drive through and ease the traffic impacts to this residential neighborhood.
— February 16, 2017 8:32 p.m.

San Diego sides with Carmel Partners in Rolando project

Another fine example of the inept DSD and the enablement, and actual SUPPORT of improper permitting by City Attorney Jan Goldsmith, and Interim-Hypocrate Mayor Todd (Jgo & Tglo). DSD routinely issues ministerial permits for projects that should be subject to full public input process all over the city. When area residents catch on to this absolutely illegal activity, the project is usually far enough along that all the residents get is "oops, we made a mistake", "there's simply nothing we can do now", "it fell through the cracks", "we can't stop it without great risk", or "we'll make sure it never happens again"....this time it's "I think we are stuck". To Goldsmith re your quote: "The City can be held liable for failing to afford a developer due process even if there would have otherwise been a legitimate basis for issuing a stop work order had the process been followed". Did you already forget about Jack in the Box North Park? Filner followed due process then, and you refused to issue the stop work order, choosing instead to face a lawsuit by the residents rather than one by the Big Bucks Box. I have a suggestion: DO YOUR DAMN JOBS CORRECTLY, ALL OF YOU ! We would have none of this abuse of neighborhoods if DSD would simply correctly apply Land Use Code, Zoning, and Community plan regulations, and stop catering to big business interests. Goldsmith wouldn't have to "defend the City" against lawsuits for improperly issued permits, and Todd would no longer have to have to "clean up the mess" and could get back to his 'sexy streets'. Hey Rolandans for Quality Infill Development -- good for you! You are part of a movement throughout the city to say 'enough is enough' and stand up for your quality of life against a corrupt municipal system. Check out two other community groups who have joined forces to stop the endless cycle of abuse to our neighborhoods: This happens all over our city. Certainly there are more groups who are fed up with it all. Maybe a united coalition of such neighborhood advocacy for groups could effect some real change in our messed up municipal system.
— November 5, 2013 8 p.m.

Let’s Be Friends

Subscribe for local event alerts, concerts tickets, promotions and more from the San Diego Reader