Sacramento Kings New Arena

Partnering with San Francisco-based JMA Ventures, the Sacramento Kings have received the blessing of Sacramento’s City Council to start construction on a 1.5-million-square-foot re-development of Sacramento Downtown Plaza, a 14-acre parcel in the heart of Sacramento’s downtown.

The development will include 350,000 square feet of retail, 475,000 square feet of office, a 250 room hotel, 550 residential units, and the new arena as rendered above for the Kings.

JMA purchased Downtown Plaza for $22 million in 2012; the Kings purchased the site from JMA for an undisclosed amount (but having borrowed $35 million for the deal) in January of this year; and the new arena is scheduled to be open by September 2016.

Meanwhile, the Golden State Warriors are back to the drawing board for their new San Francisco arena site in Mission Bay and are shooting for their arena opening in 2018, at the earliest. San Francisco’s Mayor Ed Lee had announced his “legacy” plans for building an arena for the Warriors upon San Francisco’s Piers 30-32 in time for the 2017-2018 season back in 2012.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Sierrajeff

    That’s…. startlingly unattractive. Is it supposed be like a crown, for the “Kings”?

    (cue the postings about the Sacto vs. S.F. planning approval processes, problems with Bay Area NIMBYs, etc.)

    • Posted by sf

      I live in Sac. The NIMBYs here are just as rabid. Political posters across the city have been defaced with “NO STUPID ARENA!” (nice argument). A mural of the Sacramento kings on 16th and Q Sts. was vandalized with “Schools Not Hoops!” (or something to that nature). The underground garage on J St. where the new arena will be built is Sharpied with “No Arena!” The Sacramento opposition may not be as well organized, funded, or cunning as the SF counterparts, but they are just as insane.

      So shortsighted are these people. Arenas and development CREATES tax money by IMPROVING land values, INCREASING property taxes, which goes to FUND schools, welfare, etc. This area of Sacramento is in desperate need of redevelopment, and I am excited to see the transformation!

      • Posted by Brian M

        Actually, studies by real economists (not anonymous internet posters) call your assertions into question. The issue is not “We don’t want an arena”. It is…”we don’t want the city of Sacramento to bankrupt itself in order to pay for a billionaire’s ego trip”. Which is a legitmate argument, at least.

        I personally think that the City and its local elites have been ineffectively messing with downtown Sacramento for decades and that this project may be the best solution to the problem available. But the backroom deals and the financing does seem hinky to many people.

        But this is NOT a case of NIMBYism as conventionally understood.

  2. Posted by Jake

    Yeah, and the other renderings on their site (namelink) are similar.

    Sacramento is on the hook for more than $200 million of the costs:

    “The total cost of the ESC is estimated to be $477 million. The Sacramento Kings will contribute approximately $254 million and the City will contribute approximately $223 million. The City will finance its $223 million contribution through the sale of bonds ($212.5 million) and parking and economic development funds ($10.6 million). “

    • Posted by Alai

      I hate it when they say that projects will be financed “through the sale of bonds”. Where will the money to pay back the bonds going to come from? Annual payments from the city’s general fund? Property taxes? Sales taxes?

      • Posted by parklife

        In this case, the revenue from city owned parking garages will be used to repay the bonds. The assumption is that many arena patrons will drive to the games thereby utilizing parking garages that have traditionally remained empty at night.

  3. Posted by Brad

    Shocked that this actually came to pass with Sacramentans because historically very unwilling to invest in their own city. It remains to be seen, though, how a city of suburbanites will cope with a stadium not surrounded by parking lots.

    • Posted by yertle

      Please oh sacred San Franciscan, bestow upon us the insight into proper stadium and transit development.

  4. Posted by VancouverJones

    Seriously, there should be a law against public financing of sports stadiums arenas etc.. Unless they want to break us off a piece of the league revenue…

  5. Posted by Brian M

    Vancouver Jones: Yes indeed. And this, not “NIMBYISM” is the primary argument in Sacramento, too.

Add a Comment

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