The Golden State Warriors have dropped their plans to build an arena on San Francisco’s Piers 30-32 but will still be making the move to San Francisco, landing on the parcels pictured above.
Having just purchased Salesforce.com’s remaining 12 acres in Mission Bay, the Warriors are now committed to building an 18,000-seat arena upon the undeveloped site which fronts Third Street in time for the 2018-19 NBA season, financing the project themselves, according to The Chronicle.
As we wrote about the Warriors’ original plans in late 2012:

“With San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee deeming it his legacy project, and the project sponsors lining the pockets of nearly every political, development, and public relations consultant in the city, some might consider the Warriors Arena that’s proposed to be built upon Piers 30-32 to be too big or connected to fail. But this is San Francisco, after all.”

In early 2012, we first characterized the plans for an arena upon San Francisco’s Piers 30-32 as a pipe dream and put the odds of the Warriors piers project succeeding at 5 percent, noting: “we would love to be proven wrong. And of course, there is another large parcel of undeveloped land around the corner that recently became available.” That large parcel of land is the very parcel upon which the Warriors now plan to build.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by anon

    Ed Lee must regret more than ever saying that a Warriors arena on piers 30-32 is “my legacy project.” Oops.
    Anyway, I doubt anything will ever be built on those piers. Too expensive, too many regulations, to many agencies with legal oversight.

  2. Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

    anon beat me to it. I said earlier that they weren’t going to make the the 2017-18 season at the previous site, and that Mayor Lee was demonstrating a whole lot of hubris by going around saying “it’s going to happen”.
    Hopefully now that he’s been smacked by the hard, rough hands of political reality in S.F., he’ll wise up about future projects.

  3. Posted by wai yip tung

    Thats the worst news today. Transit to this site is worse than pier 30. I was hoping something interesting will happen on the salesforce site.

  4. Posted by seriously

    this is why we can’t have nice things. now it’s even farther from BART! the idiots who banded together to try and block this are killing this city’s growth. i would loved to have this on those decrepit piers. They should have at least let it go up for a vote (which is sad that that’s even a possibility).

  5. Posted by gribble

    Hopefully it will put pressure on the city to underground Caltrain and improve the T-Third.
    Suddenly ground floor retail/restaurants in Mission Bay are going to be hot, especially as the hospitals/Kaiser/arena complete.

  6. Posted by Sam

    Transit concerns are very real here. Should be hilarious people trying to use the 2 car T line trains. Maybe that will point out to citizens how silly light rail is in a city this dense? I mean it makes sense in Portland, Salt Lake City, but spending money to have ‘transit’ in a city that outgrew that form of transportation in literally the early 20th century, doesn’t make sense. I picture people walking from Caltrain, bart…well only the T will go there.
    That said, great decision to move the stadium.

  7. Posted by Dan

    This will be good for Dogpatch bars and restaurants. If the Warriors are smart, they will develop the excess land about the arena as an entertainment district, with places to linger, eat and drink before and after events.

  8. Posted by anon

    I’m sure there will now be zero opposition to this plan, since everyone was saying this is where it “should” go.
    Horrible day for the city, this is an atrocious location for transit compared to piers 30/32.

  9. Posted by anon

    Good god, this new location is TWO MILES from BART. Wow, this is actually going to be a congestion apocalypse.

  10. Posted by Miguel

    I live in the Dogpatch/Potrero Hill area, and am excited about the new location. Piers 30/32 seemed like a pipedream for an arena location. I believe the most responsible and politically acceptable solution is to tear down the piers. (Evenually, as there will be significant costs for that as well.) With regards to the Mission Bay site, I’m excited to be able to take the T or actually walk to the arena.

  11. Posted by James

    Just in time to be killed preemptively by Prop B!

  12. Posted by Zig

    Transit first my ass. This is FAR from regional transit
    This project was about the only thing with the backing to fix Piers 30/32.

  13. Posted by Grace

    Unlike many commenting here, I am totally supportive of this plan. It will bring night life and retail development to Mission Bay Area. Warriors will have chance to build out the area and they own it. T -line will be ramped up, subway will be in and train station at 22nd. And they do not have to worry about prop B because it is not waterfront.

  14. Posted by anon

    Grace, how is this not a waterfront location?

  15. Posted by miguel

    Prop B only applies to port owned land.

  16. Posted by RobBob

    I was looking forward to not having to look at the crumbling decrepit pier every time I walk on the Embarcadero. Now it looks like I’ll have to look at it until it sink into the bay, since no one will touch the property now with a ten foot pole…tainted by anti development forces.

  17. Posted by Can't think of Cool Name

    I remember being at a SFMTA hosted meeting where the discussion was about improving public transit in this area. One of the ideas kicked around by them was to not terminate the E line at CalTrain, but to continue to run it into Mission Bay on the T line tacks with a circle turnaround somewhere close to where the location for the arena will be. Sounds like they should start taking that Idea more seriously, especially if they decide to go with the double car trains Muni is using today instead of the single car vintage trains for the E line.
    I could also see this as an additional argument to terminate the T/Central Subway not in Chinatown, but at least in North Beach, for those wanting to take Muni from that area to Warrior games in Mission Bay.

  18. Posted by Wai Yip Tung

    In fact it is along a beautiful stretch of waterfront few people know. I commute to work via this route. I will just swallow my disappointment and hope Warrior can help bring this area to live, and have another reason to justify the investment on T-Third.

  19. Posted by fogmachine

    I agree with Grace – much better location; when the T is done it will be easy to get to (though BART will require a transfer) and it’s an area with much better parking. It’s not just the 41 Warriors home games – it’s the other 150 nights a year they’re hoping for events.

  20. Posted by sf

    The cuisine of hospital food courts will be quite enticing.

  21. Posted by g

    Not unanticipated. Happy to see it is still getting built in the city though. As a side benefit it will inject some life and activity into MB.

  22. Posted by Wai Yip Tung

    Can Piers 30 be used for office? Need to call Google and other technies to save the pier from falling into the sea.

  23. Posted by Zig

    T-line can only support two car trains which is woefully inadequate. Someone commented on the E line which is even lower capacity.
    This is not a great location for regional transit.
    Perhaps the best the city can do is to start running redundant modern LRT all along the water front but I am not hopeful they will do anything
    When people say the T line will be “ramped up” not sure what they mean. Being near BART is way better. GSW is a regional team and I am not sure how the fans from the East Bay will get to this location
    IMO a real lost opportunity and a shame this city is so provincial still

  24. Posted by S

    don’t forget caltrain is super close to this location. A lot of fans will no doubt take that just as they do for the giants.

  25. Posted by Joel

    This seems like good news. A new stadium will put more pressure on BART to build a second transbay tube. It could go from Alameda to Mission Bay and down 16th St.

  26. Posted by anon

    In 2017 the T-third will be a straight shot via the Central Subway to Caltrain and Powell station BART.
    Going northbound, it gets underground at Bryant St. and will pass through Union Square, Chinatown, North Beach, and someday probably Fisherman’s Wharf. Not too shabby.

  27. Posted by zzzzzz

    I’ll bet Salesforce made out like bandits on the sale price! That is an absolutely primo development parcel, nothing like anywhere else in the city.

  28. Posted by Zig

    @ S I think the maps might be misleading here. It is not super close to either 22nd or 4th and King IIRC. Sort of in between.
    @ Joel LOL. I assume this is satire?

  29. Posted by Wai Yip Tung

    T-Third’s frequency will be more than double once central subway is completed. The peak frequency should be about once every 4 minute if I remember right. The increase is due to expected increase in ridership in the new segment that it serves. Not sure how Warrior game will affect this.
    Caltrain is also accessible to Pier 30. The Salesforce site is only a little bit closer to Caltrain.
    I think the main loser will be people who could have walk to Pier 30, including all the workers in SF downtown and everyone who could have arrive in Embarcadero station.

  30. Posted by jlasf

    Much better location. Mission Bay needs a draw to bring visitors down there and help out the retail and restaurants that the residents there will need. An active, vibrant restaurant/bar area could also help alleviate some of the pre/post-game crowds. If there are major crowds, people will plan to get there early or stay late to avoid the crush.
    Next step: get a great architect to make a signature building that will define the Mission Bay area. So far, the architecture in Mission Bay has been bland, to say the least. Think of a Calatrava or Meier building and it could be a landmark for the whole area.

  31. Posted by Can't think of Cool Name

    And I would guess this would raise the question of what about ferry service and water taxis – how could they access this site…
    Forgot that at that SFMTA meeting I was at, they also shared an idea of bus service along 16th street all the way down to 3rd. I could see that route making a slight change in Mission Bay and making a loop from 16th, Mississippi, 22nd street (CalTrain stop) and 3rd. That bus service would scoop up/ drop off at least some BART and CalTrain riders.

  32. Posted by Moto mayhem

    Such a shame and embarrassment for San Francisco that the pier30-32 stadium not moving forward. Another example of SF having to give up a truly special iconic piece of architecture in the most perfect beautiful setting because of anti- progressive selfish and shortsighted people

  33. Posted by Joel

    @Zig: http://thealamedan.org/news/bart-station-alameda-maybe
    It could happen sooner than a sane person would expect. Soon being in 2050 as opposed to 2100.

  34. Posted by Moto mayhem

    Take it from a place with best public transit in the city and move to a place with little public transit. Terrible idea for traffic

  35. Posted by Wai Yip Tung

    #22 is planned to be reroute to 16th St all the way to UCSF as part of the TEP proposal. It is not planned, nor is it like for it to connect to 22nd St Caltrain. It is an electric trolley and it can only run on street with overhead power line. In any case T-Third already serve Caltrain.

  36. Posted by Zig

    I think the main loser will be people who could have walk to Pier 30, including all the workers in SF downtown and everyone who could have arrive in Embarcadero station.”
    Yes the whole East Bay

  37. Posted by S

    @Zig Caltrain is about a 15 min walk from this stadium. On game days for the Giants, I see people walking along the embarcadero from bart all the way to the stadium. this is considerably less than that. Bike share might be cool too since it’s a really easy ride down Illinois

  38. Posted by Mark

    Yeah, I can see the “4-minute headways” on the T-line happening. Not. Also, if you think MUNI hoarding trains for Giants games is bad, imagine the T during Warriors games. 1-car trains, BTW. MUNI doesn’t have enough in its fleet to run 2-car trains on the line.
    Granted, the transit option sucks here for regional connections (BART, Caltrain), but the Fremont A’s proposal would build a stadium not even remotely close to public transit.

  39. Posted by Pfffttt

    Just f[]cking great. Traffic on 3rd, 4th, 16th, Mariposa, King, The Embarcadero and the surrounding streets all. year. long. The Mission Bay NIMBYS need to band together to stop this, if at all possible.

  40. Posted by anon

    It’s not just the 41 Warriors home games – it’s the other 150 nights a year they’re hoping for events.
    That’s what makes this location extremely frightening. A cleanly run T can still only handle two cars full every 4-5 minutes (the stations being dug out now only have a capacity of two cars), which is the absolute best case. Muni is more likely to only be able to handle two cars every 8-10 minutes.
    That’s a drop in the bucket compared to the capacity of BART. It’s a travesty that we’re allowing this to be built so far from BART.
    I’ll be out in force to try to kill this as a location – it would be much better to have them stay in Oakland, where at least there’s decent transit access.

  41. Posted by DanRH

    Glad that something is going ahead.
    Bummed that it’s not going to be as close to downtown as the Piers were, but still, seems do-able with that Mariposa T-line stop right there.
    Also bummed for East-Bay’ers as while the Powell-to-T-line is do-able, it just seemed like it would have been better for them if it was more downtown.
    But probably great news for DogPatch area and for the Concert-attending Peninsula folks (no more long trek to Oakland).
    Ultimlately, the success of that area is going to be tied to other companies locating there / workers there / etc. – not ‘planned’ commmunities / shops setup by the Warriors.
    Wonder if this is a win or loss for the new Anchor Brewing site?
    Huge win for the newer Magnolia Dogpatch I’d guess.

  42. Posted by UCSF Parking

    Night games should have acouple of thousand empty spaces at Mission Bay parking garages and ground lots. UCSF already opens them up during Giants games.

  43. Posted by James

    I assume Snohetta will remain the architect for the new site. There is greater potential for a landmark building here, without the height limit/view blocking concerns.

  44. Posted by Greg

    Big losers: all of the warriors East Bay fans. This site is a giant F-you to them- getting from Mission Bay to East bay is huge pain in the ass on public transit, and driving only works if SF traffic cooperates (Rarely). This says a lot about how the Warriors view their fan base going forward.
    As for the Mission Bay site, UCSF parking is right, there are tons of garage spots that sit vacant at nights. Even if a large percentage of people drive to the arena (and I bet they will), the large number of garage spots, coupled with the arena being a lot smaller then AT&T park mean that while traffic will be bad, it probably won’t be worse than on Giants game days which has proven to manageable a decade on.
    As a former UCSF researcher, this is also a net negative for UCSF students and researchers. Development of the area surrounding campus will accelerate faster than expected making everything more unaffordable for the student population. I can you from experience that UCSF is already paying a major faculty premium because of living costs and that its very hard to recruit graduate students given the cost of living. I expect more UCSF housing to go up sooner rather than later.

  45. Posted by anon

    Now imagine what a cluster F*** it would be if the I-280 elevated freeway were removed as has been recently discussed. It would be gridlock nearly every day covering the entire area of Mission Bay.
    The good news on the law and order front is the Mission Bay arena location is nearly right next to the new SF Police Deptarment HQ.

  46. Posted by zzzzzz

    So does this mean the Warriors will no longer need to build a condo or hotel to raise funds for the arena construction? Since there won’t be the expense of renovating the decrepit piers I imagine the construction costs could be considerably lower.

  47. Posted by Luc

    But the property acquisition costs are not inconsiderable.
    http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2010/11/salesforcecom_acquires_14_mission_bay_acres_to_build_2.html
    I would imagine this will be a wash construction cost wise for Warriors. But with massively lower political hassle, its a big net win

  48. Posted by Mark

    Okay, while folks (including myself) are complaining about transit around the proposed site, how about building a Caltrain station (at-grade or below) closer to the site (and Mission Bay) at 16th St. to either replace or supplement 22nd St.? This will cut down the walk to the arena from a mile to about .25/.3 of a mile.

  49. Posted by Patrick

    This location is also near the hot-hot-hot Pier 70 development. Build a terminal for ferries from the East Bay and water taxis from downtown.

  50. Posted by JWS

    Watch all the “activists” who demanded the arena be built in Mission Bay come out of the woodwork to protest this new location in 3, 2, 1…

  51. Posted by grrr

    No Wall on the Waterfront and their entitled supporters should be forced to pay to fix piers 30-32. Let’s put that motion on the ballot.

  52. Posted by anon

    Grrr, please. That’s a silly argument.
    For example, I propose exiling all poor people from San Francisco, creating Bel Air II and generating billions in property tax reveue. If you oppose it, you should pay for those billions in unrealized revenue.
    Totally ludicrous logic, especially about a deal that may never have passed through the multitude levels of regulartory hurdles.

  53. Posted by Jill

    How will all the Oakland fans get there now? This is nowhere near Bart . Screw the rich entitled a holes who blocked the pier 30 deal

  54. Posted by rr

    Good lord. I work at UCSF Mission Bay and the Giants traffic during the evening rush hour is already atrocious. Fortunately, the basketball games start after rush hour ends, so it might not be so bad. Having a pub closer than 3rd and Townsend would be an nice addition to the after-work happy hour too.
    Though, if they could put a caltrain station at UCSF/Warriors Arena underground on the way to the transbay terminal, that would really improve things. Oh wait, this is San Francisco. That has less of a chance of happening than the Warriors on Pier 30.

  55. Posted by Frank C.

    Spending public money to build a new caltrain station specifically for this arena? No way.
    Caltrain is already overburdened on workdays when Giants game days are not happening. The whole bay area arena/stadium thing is a mess, unless billions are spent on public transit….which will never happen. Therefore, I say no new arenas (and their minimum wage spillover jobs) anywhere. Zone for high density housing instead. (Yeah, I know I’m dreaming.)

  56. Posted by formidable doer of the nasty

    Good decision by the Warriors and good for the future of the whole Mission Bay, Dogpatch, Potrero Hill, even Bayview area. This also means the SFMTA had better get serious about solving the many traffic and transit issues around the 16th St corridor. Caltrain won’t be under ground by the time this arena opens but there will be about 1,000 new residential units right on 16th or just a couple of blocks off it, all west of the Caltrain crossing. Rerouting the 22 is a start but it’s nowhere near sufficient.

  57. Posted by Vancouverjones

    Good . This reduces the chance that there will be public financing for the project. Of course the property taxes collected will be laughable thanks to prop 13. And I’m sure that the monies generated by this business will be taxed at some insanely low effective tax rate. Oh we’ll, u can’t win them all.

  58. Posted by Jackson

    Vancouverjones, you do know that all new real property will be taxed based the purchase price right?
    San Francisco’s current property tax rate is 1.188% of purchase price, even before the parcel taxes are added. The growth in Mission Bay will add handsomely to City coffers.
    Proposition 13 will only enter the picture in subsequent years to cap the property values at 2% annually.

  59. Posted by Little_Boxes

    Basketball. What is that? Is it like soccer? Is the turf real?

  60. Posted by EH

    Much as I love to see Mayor Lee fail at this for focusing on his legacy over potholes, I liked the Pier 30/2 design a lot but this is probably a better overall plan. And the “shorten 280″ thing is hopefully indeed dead, since a Mariposa cutoff would cause traffic to back up onto both the 101/280 fork *and* the 280/101 fork on game days.

  61. Posted by e flat

    glad we are getting an arena for concerts and events (not a basketball fan)….but sorry the Giants and Warriors couldn’t have worked something out on the Giants lot A (SWL 337). Someting like Staples Center/LA Live would have been very cool. Instead we’ll get an extension of boring Mission Bay (an inner city suburban business park) Lot’s of wasted space and uninspired architecture. In addition we will have to live with the decrepit piers until they are torn down.
    Nice going Agnos, Pestkin, Stewarts and all the other nimbys.

  62. Posted by Can't think of Cool Name

    I can now see the outcome of pier 30/32 being the same as the Brannan Street pier – tore out by the Army Corp of Engineers at taxpayer expense. I can’t see anything built there that would recover the cost of rebuilding the piers due to zoning restrictions.
    Given that pier 30/32 is a parking lot five days a week for a small percentage of those who drive into work and for Giants game day parking (500+ spaces?), my fear is now that somebody will be eyeing SWL330 for a parking deck (it is zoned for 105/65) to reclaim lost spaces.
    I believe people will still drive in the coming years, even though the city is “transit first…”

  63. Posted by Mark

    @Frank C.: building a Caltrain station at 16th St. would not be just for the arena, it would be for the entire MB area, given the huge commercial, educational and residential developments being constructed, thereby making commuting/traveling easier for many folks along the entire corridor.
    If people are moaning that BART is so far away, then it’s clear that a lone tunnel under Market and Mission streets is not reaching enough places to meet demands. Blame BART for this, not the Warriors, since BART’s aim is to continue to expand into exurbia rather than infill and the transit cores of SF and Oakland.

  64. Posted by R

    “Blame BART for this, not the Warriors”
    I don’t think anyone is blaming the Warriors, they wanted to build near public transportation but weren’t allowed to.

  65. Posted by inclinejj

    Giants, sound like they want to develop the A lot. So the A lot was never an option. Plus I don’t expect the Giants ownership to do anything but help the Giants and their pockets.

  66. Posted by invented

    If we have to have this thing, can’t the central subway be extended way south to replace the quaint and silly T? (always was)
    Large developments south rising, Hunters, Schlage, the dump in Brisbane, booming Dogpatch (needs no help from an arena btw).
    Move people quickly and rethink 3rd altogether?

  67. Posted by Can't think of Cool Name

    @invented, I guess its all how you look at it. The Central Subway is nothing more to me than the T under grounded from Bryant to Stockton & Washington.
    If you’re proposing under grounding the T into Mission Bay from Bryant, I’d counter that they continue the tunneling from Stockton & Washington to North Beach and complete a new, additional station there instead. That would allow more folks there access to another public transit route besides 30/45 to the general vicinity, and with a direct shot to the arena. Its kind of almost in the plans now and doable in the immediate future.
    If you’re talking about the T/K merrily meandering down 3rd, I hear you. Assuming that the T Breda car are upgraded to two cars like the N, I’d like to see the the K line upgraded to two Breda cars as well, the E changed from a single vintage car to the two Breda cars and rerouted down into Mission Bay with a turnaround around the arena location, not terminate at CalTrain.
    At least then you would have multiple lines (T, K, E) with identical Breda cars servicing the area, improving (the best it can) public transit by the arena via light rail.

  68. Posted by Alvin

    @invented The T-Third is the Central subway. Linke from previous
    http://www.centralsubwaysf.com/sites/default/files/maps/alignment_map_091412.pdf

  69. Posted by invented

    “If we have to have this thing, can’t the central subway be extended way south to replace the quaint and silly T? (always was)”
    sorry (!) — I meant under-grounded, not extended.

  70. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    invented – The central subway is being constructed with stations that have a maximum two car capacity. Undergrounding would help improve performance but not capacity. To serve event venues like this you need high peak capacity. Even long BART trains get overloaded during Oakland Coliseum events. The Central subway/T has no chance to meet that sort of demand.
    Best bet: add a Dogpatch ferry port and schedule extra runs timed to events.

  71. Posted by sfjhawk

    While you have to appreciate the optimism around modifying (adding Caltrain stations, extending the Central subway) and adding options (ferry lines) but this just emphasizes the fact that this is an inferior location to one that was equidistant for the majority of the public transportation options: BART, Caltrain, muni, Transbay terminal, Ferry Building, water taxi’s. Traffic wise, this just shifts it from one choke point (Embarcadero/Bay Bridge egress) to another one (280N exits).
    It was said earlier but the biggest losers: 1) fans – and attendees of other events – from the East and North Bay. 2) debatable depending on your perspective but the residents near the Pier 30/32 site who could’ve used the additional green/park space in the neighborhood.
    Great win for dogpatch!

  72. Posted by Zig

    “The Central subway/T has no chance to meet that sort of demand.”
    Perhaps they could run the N all the way to the location on game nights or implement an Embracedero shuttle? Preferably these would run all surface and never enter the Market Street subway thereby making them about 20 minutes faster than otherwise.

  73. Posted by anon

    “The Central subway/T has no chance to meet that sort of demand.”
    Au contraire. It will carry more riders than any other Muni line.
    http://www.centralsubwaysf.com/content/faqs
    7. What is the estimated projected ridership?
    When the Central Subway opens in 2019, the projected ridership along the entire T Third Line is estimated to be 43,700 daily boardings.
    By 2030, ridership on the T Third Line is projected to reach 65,000 customers per day along the entire alignment. This is about 20 percent higher than projected 2030 ridership for the most heavily used existing Muni line, the N Judah Line. Once the Central Subway Project is complete, the T Third Line will be similar in length to the N Judah Line.

  74. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    ^^^ Consider that “more riders than any other Muni line” might still not be enough.
    The problem with serving events is that they get two bursts of traffic: just before and after the event. Even the standard daily rush “hour” is spread across several hours. An event rush is concentrated into 30 or 40 minutes.
    Best solution: add some intermittent temporary bars and snack shops so people can chill out while waiting for the surge to subside :-)

  75. Posted by anon

    This is about 20 percent higher than projected 2030 ridership for the most heavily used existing Muni line, the N Judah Line.
    And most of us would agree that the N Judah is an embarrassment, operating at FAR lower capacity than the alignment should.

  76. Posted by VancouverJones

    @Jackson:
    Thanks for the input on the property tax issue. I really meant to focus on the low property tax collection in the subsequent years. Government entities in CA have are in a little bit of fiscal bind …. A lot property owners were sitting on the sidelines for decades. They were not contibuting enough toward keeping our municipal services up to the level we expect in a modern society.
    I don’t mean the following as a snarky comment. How about repurposing some of the tech buses to provide transportation to the games If a tech bus has a final stop in Alameda or Oakland… couldn’t it just pick up passengers there and head straight to the game? Or maybe the buses could just act as “first mile” and “last mile” shuttles to exisiting public transportation nodes. This would generate a lot of good will in the community and help make a great contribution toward solving the transporation problem.

  77. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    ^^^ Any extra revenue achieved by using the tech buses would need to exceed the cleaning charges required after each event. Commuters might not like riding in buses that smell like stale beer.
    I don’t know about GSW fans but some Giants and Sharks fans tend to make a mess of Caltrain.

  78. Posted by formidable doer of the nasty

    Man, some of you really need to get out more. You’re talking like you think this arena is going to be in some undeveloped wasteland far from residential and retail/entertainment neighborhoods. Have you paid any attention to Dogpatch or Mission Bay lately? This arena will not open for at least 4 years; surely you can extrapolate the current growth around there just a little bit. To call it a “suburban business park” (and on multiple threads, at that) is beyond ignorant.

  79. Posted by anonanon

    As someone who was against the original Pier 30/32 proposal based on the lack of an adequate transportation infrastructure, the new location doesn’t make me feel much better. Sure, it’s a little further away from all the new residential units under construction near the original proposed location, Lumina, second ORH tower, etc. But fundamentally, Caltrain can’t even keep up with its regular rush-hour crowd. When I used to work in Palo Alto and there was a Giants evening game, I would always take the earliest possible baby-bullet train at 4-something. That would arrive to 4th & King more than 2 hours before the first pitch. Still, even out of Palo Alto, it would be completely packed with beer-drinking Giants fans and getting a seat would be very much hit or miss. (Nothing wrong with them drinking beer. It’s allowed before a game and most fans would be happy and friendly in anticipation of the game.) However, if you are a commuter, having to stand versus getting a seat makes a lot of difference for your quality of life. After a long day at work, can you sit down on the train, relax and read a newspaper, and maybe get some work done on your laptop? Or do you have to stand all the way from Palo Alto to SF hanging on for dear life as the train rattles and rolls? So Caltrain can’t adequately handle even it’s regular rush-hour commute crowd, it certainly can’t adequately handle the Giants crowd a decade and a half after AT&T Park was built. And now, some clowns want to add 200 games/events per year in a new arena, some of which will certainly overlap with the 81 regular season home games the Giants play.
    And then you have MUNI. Ever seen what a Giants game does to it? And the Giants have been at AT&T for a while. Does anyone realistically think they will be ever be able to adequately serve the needed capacity? Reminds me of Willie Brown’s campaign promise when running for mayor that he would “fix MUNI in 100 days”. He later wrote in his memoires that it was the most stupid thing he ever said in his life.
    So given the limitations of the transportation infrastructure, why can’t the Warriors just stay put? For SF fans who want to watch a game, it’s a mere 20 minute BART ride from the originally proposed pier location.

  80. Posted by Louis

    Wont miss it at piers 30-32 location; wont see it at this location.
    The dynamic of SF land use / politics is the more interesting story here.
    Wonder how the Giants and forest city are feeling today about their waterfront proposals. The prop measure will pass with momentum; they are next in line and they would seem have less “special” justification than the arena, such as that was.

  81. Posted by poor.ass.millionaire

    Overall this is a solid win for MB, dogpatch and Bayview, making them all more connected and relevant to entertainment- which goes beyond the stadium- new bars, restaurants and cafés. And once the T is extended to the central subway, that will be another major coup for these 3 hoods.
    As for UCSF grad students getting priced out of MB, all I can say is, welcome to The New Bayview(tm)! It’s getting better all the time.
    As a new property owner in Bayview I’m happy about this decision (even though I hate any form of organized sports.)

  82. Posted by moto mayhem

    from a traffic and accessiblity standpoint, this is a terrible location as compared to Pier30-32 and is going to be a nightmare. But I love the Warriors and a new concert venue is desperately needed. This new location really suck for those from Oakland, as well as those of us frm the western side of SF. Luckily I have a motorcycle and there are plenty of new bike lanes (thanks SFBC) between the richmond and mission bay that I can zoom through

  83. Posted by soccermom

    Will the Warriors have to pay traffic impact fees?
    If you want to build a residence in many parts of the SOMA plan geographies, you have to pay traffic impact fees. Can this new arena help fund a new caltrain station?
    Aside from that, I have a hard time with the ‘bad transit’ argument. The city isn’t exactly rife with arena-capable sites that are well served by multi-modal transit. What did we expect?
    Patrick’s ferry terminal idea for East Bay fans is great. That would be a pretty great family/date night, hopping on the ferry and shooting across the bay to a game/concert.

  84. Posted by spencer

    “The city isn’t exactly rife with arena-capable sites that are well served by multi-modal transit. ”
    Pier 30-32 was the best area that is well served by multi-modal transit.

  85. Posted by poor.ass.millionaire

    “Luckily I have a motorcycle and there are plenty of new bike lanes (thanks SFBC) between the richmond and mission bay that I can zoom through”
    Motorcycles in bike lanes? Bro, is that kosher?

  86. Posted by anon

    The city isn’t exactly rife with arena-capable sites that are well served by multi-modal transit.
    100% correct, the city has exactly one of these location – and we just successfully stopped building an arena in that location…smart.

  87. Posted by soccermom

    “Motorcycles in bike lanes? Bro, is that kosher?”
    No, and it’s an obnoxious recipe to get run over. But yo, moto mayhem!!!! WHEN I GET ON MY MY BIKE I AM ALL MAYHEM.
    Also, LOUD PIPES SAVE LIVES SO YOU BETTER HEAR ME COMING MISTER DRIVER! MOTO MAYHEM!!?!?!?!!!
    And, I WANT TO SPLIT LANES AT 70 WHILE YOU DRIVERS CAN ONLY GO 40. I AM MAKING STUPID CHOICES BECAUSE I CAN. LATER, FROM MY HOSPITAL BED, I WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT DRIVERS NOT ‘SEEING’ ME AS I ZOOM UP BETWEEN LANES WHERE NO ONE EXPECTS A VEHICLE TO BE.
    BECAUSE MOTO MAYHEM!!!!
    I AM A LONE WOLF WITHOUT RULES!!! OOOUUUUUUUUU!

  88. Posted by anonanon

    “100% correct, the city has exactly one of these location – and we just successfully stopped building an arena in that location…smart.”
    SF doesn’t need an arena. Basketball games and rap concerts, that’s exactly why God created Oakland.

  89. Posted by Fishchum

    I have tickets to see Fleetwood Mac at Oracle Arena in December. Imagine my surprise to find out that they’re a “rap” act.

  90. Posted by R

    Wow. That’s quite impressively racist anonanon.

  91. Posted by anonanon

    “I have tickets to see Fleetwood Mac at Oracle Arena in December. Imagine my surprise to find out that they’re a “rap” act.”
    Sorry, forgot about the codger bands. The Rolling Stones played there last year. But why would you care whether they play in Oakland or Mission Bay?

  92. Posted by Fishchum

    Because there isn’t any place I’d care to walk to after a show at the Oakland Arena. Even if I did, I’d have to make sure to catch the last BART train back to SF at what, 12:15?

  93. Posted by anon

    “Motorcycles in bike lanes? Bro, is that kosher?”
    According to Merriam-Webster, the definition of ‘bike’ is:
    1: bicycle
    2: motorcycle
    3: motorbike

  94. Posted by anonanon

    Your Fleetwood concert in December starts at 8. Hopefully, it will be over in time to catch the last 20-minute BART ride to SF. But if we are talking around midnight, your choices are going to be limited no matter where you are. Might as well take BART back to SF and use whatever downtown options there are for being open late.

  95. Posted by Fishchum

    You’re not very bright, are you anonanon? There’s nothing to do once you walk out of the Oakland Arena. Mission Bay has plenty of options nearby to go for a drink. Even if the Oakland Arena did have some bars within walking distance I’d still have to leave to take BART back to SF by midnight. With Mission Bay, I’m already in SF and can Uber to pretty much anywhere I want to go IN SF.

  96. Posted by anonanon

    This is not exactly rocket science, Fishchum. You walk out of the Oakland Arena, spend 20 minutes on BART. Now, you are in SF and can take Uber anywhere you want. Problem solved. Shouldn’t be a very hard concept to understand.

  97. Posted by Fishchum

    You walk outside the arena at Mission Bay and there are places to drink RIGHT THERE. You don’t have to worry about getting onto a crowded BART train with all the other concert goers (good luck with that) and unless you’re going to the Mission, deal with getting to where it is you want to go via Uber once you’re back in SF.
    Got it?

  98. Posted by anonanon

    The places in Mission Bay that would be “RIGHT THERE” would probably be equally crowded as the BART trains, so what’s the point? You already bought tickets for a concert in December and you are freaking out about the hardship of spending 20 minutes on BART? Good f*cking Lord!

  99. Posted by Fishchum

    No more crowded than the bars outside AT&T Park, which I frequent all the time after games.
    Who’s freaking out? You’re the one who asked why I would care about going to Mission Bay or Oakland, and I answered you. Don’t get your panties in a wad because someone gives you a response you either don’t understand or agree with.

  100. Posted by anonanon

    I go to AT&T Park, too. And everything is crowded after a game. Bars, MUNI, cab stands. Good luck getting an Uber right away! Do you seriously think that your Mission Bay site would do much better, especially if a game/event coincided with a Giants game? So yes, I don’t understand your response as to why someone would buy tickets for codger concert 8 months in advance that would presumably involve a significant amount of standing in line, etc. and then would be particularly concerned about a 20 minute BART ride.

  101. Posted by anon

    The owners of the Warriors are very smart. They see the trends. The population that will be able to afford 40+ Warriors games and 100+ other events will prefer to come to SF (or they already live in SF) than Oakland. This location can command higher prices and fill more seats than Oakland. Building this all with private money. Nice that I will no longer need to drive out to Oakland for pro ball games or Disney-on-Ice (yeah, I have two girls who happen to love both). Good for all around (except Oakland-ers, but on the plus side the Coliseum will still get used for more down-market and thus less expensive events).

  102. Posted by Fishchum

    Are you drunk? Did I say get an Uber right away? No, I didn’t. After an arena event, I guarantee you I’ll be able to walk to The Ramp, Mission Rock, Sea Dog, Dogpatch Saloon, Connecticut Yankee, Thee Parkside or Blooms and be able to get in and get a drink and stay until closing time if I like.
    The fact that you mentioned I bought a ticket 8 months in advance tells me you aren’t very bright – you generally buy concert tickets when they go on sale.
    Again, you obviously don’t agree with me and are having difficulty grasping the concept of why I would rather go to Mission Bay vs. the Oakland Arena. It’s not that difficult to understand, but apparently you’re having problems.

  103. Posted by anonanon

    The concept is very simple: You are going to an event involving 18,000 people. How many seats are there at Mission Rock or the Ramp? Could be crowded. How much hardship is involved in spending 20 minutes on BART coming in to the City compared to having just gone through the hardship of attending a crowded codger concert? I think you are the one having problems explaining that.

  104. Posted by Fishchum

    AT&T Park is 42K and I get into bars just fine after a game (hint: not all 42K people go out to bar after a game). There are plenty of bars in Mission Bay with more to come.
    I’m done. You’re an obvious idiot or just trolling.

  105. Posted by anonanon

    Fishchum, if your best argument is that the person you are debating with is stupid, maybe you are the one who has a problem with stupidity.

  106. Posted by moto mayhem

    soccermom.
    you have a lot of biker anger. I do not split lanes at 70, and have never been riding 25+ yrs. mayhem is a pun. i create as much mayhem as a bedridden granny
    I was making a joke about using all the city funded bike lanes on my motorcycle to get to this arena they are building near no public transit. Because they divert transit money for stupid bike projects and then the ant-progressive morons block an arena from the place in the city that has the best public transit. There is a lot of meat in that but it went over your head.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *