Warriors Mission Bay Arena Open Space

Not including the future Bayfront Park, a five-and-a-half-acre waterfront expanse across Terry Francois Boulevard with water-oriented activities and large lawns which the development of the Warriors’ Mission Bay Arena will trigger, the arena project itself includes 3.2 acres of plazas and publicly accessible space.

In addition to a proposed 3,700 square foot plaza at the corner of South and Third, and a 12,500 square foot southeast plaza at the corner of Terry Francois and 16th, the Arena’s mid-block Main Plaza between South and 16th along Third Street would measure 57,300 square feet, roughly the size of the plaza portion of San Francisco’s Union Square.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by d-b

    I look at this drawing and find the site crowded – too many buildings. It would be nicer to forget the office portion and have a greater setback from Terry Francois Blvd.

    • Posted by invented

      Love the office buildings bc they hide the arena not that I don’t like the building per se, but what’s the point? The office buildings better integrate the area with the scale of walkable MIssion Bay and Dogpatch. Ideally, I’d sink the stadium and build a taller mixed-use complex on top with sports underground. Unlike the previous proposal (or their Oslo opera house), I don’t see how this relates to the Bay — all the more reason to build down.

      As for transportation, there are probably 50 development sites on 16th in the years ahead – if we can resist the urge to build three-story quaintness on a key urban corridor–upzone and let – pvt money fund underground from 3rd to Castro. IMO

      • Posted by Mark

        Agreed. The short sightedness of the Central Subway project itself is testament to bad Bay Area transit planning. Billions will be spent expanding BART to the fringe of San Jose with only a couple of behemoth car-dependent stations along the way while existing, dense urban cores remain neglected, not to mention proposed development of blighted and infill areas get the shaft as well. The arena will be built, the entire Mission Bay complex will be maxed out and the majority of people will drive. Even with the plans of tearing back 280 to 16th St. has no one brought up the idea of “hey, let’s extend the N-Judah from 4th/King down to 16th St. and to the arena.” Even something as trivial as that would help ease the transit deficit and make connections to other transit modes easier.

        • Posted by Can't think of Cool Name

          @Mark, I remember talk a few years ago of terminating the southern end of the E not at Caltrain (Caltrain & King stop), but at a new loop built out roughly around 16th. If (and a big if I’m guessing) Muni decides to punt the historic trollies planned for the E and replace them with the standard Muni cars that can help alleviate some pressure. While it wouldn’t be perfect, people who can’t make the walk (or don’t want to) can grab either the T or E from/to Caltrain (4th & King stop), the T would get folks to BART further up the line at Powell and if they missed a T, the E would make a stop at the Ferry Building, for a few minute walk to the Embarcadero Muni/BART station.

          Plus, if Muni decides to extend the K from its planned termination at the Embarcadero station post T/Central Subway completion back to its route today down 3rd, that’s another train servicing the area.

          • Posted by Mark

            You’re right…the platforms for the E extension to Caltrain were built about 10 years ago. The problem, of course, is that the trains have different platform requirements so there are two different platforms to accommodate. Instead of improving service, service delays will increase because either the E or the N will have to wait for the other train to board/offboard. Once again, clever planning on the part of SFMTA. Another problem with the E is that it’s not reliable. It’s all too common to wait 55 min for a streetcar after seeing 3 go by in 5 minutes. I read about transit projects that are extremely low priority for MUNI, including extending the N from Duboce/Church directly to Mission Bay, bypassing downtown completely. While having the N in the picture would be better than nothing, this route would only have one critical transfer point at 16th St BART which would great for riders heading south, but inconvenient for East Bay travellers.

            The arena, with 200 proposed events per year, needs more than single-car trains backed up for blocks, causing problems throughout the system. The city lacks a robust system that can hardly function on a good day. It also lacks integration of major facilities along transit routes. In DC, for example, the convention center has access to 2 subway lines. The green line serves the new baseball stadium. A station on the blue/orange line was built at RFK Stadium. Verizon Center sits on top of a major transfer station with 3 subway lines. It can be done because it has been done.

        • Posted by Joy J

          right on!

    • Posted by James

      I disagree. The Bay is so wide and open, it’s OK to have density next to it. I assume the “Event Hall” and “Market Hall” will have wide terraces and windows facing the water. The site doesn’t touch the water so it can’t engage it directly, but it does appear to address the shoreline park.

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        Agree, I get the feeling this will be a bit like Davies, with its bank of windows facing City Hall.

    • Posted by Joy J

      I agree put the office somewhere else!

  2. Posted by Mark

    Transit is pathetic in this part of town (which isn’t saying much for the rest of the city). The T line will not be able to handle the arena crowds…one car trains running from Chinatown. Real smart transit idea. The current ball park transit set up is a total cluster f*** whenever there’s a game or event…and that’s with the N & T running plus Caltrain nearby (and BART for those up for the walk). If the city is hell bent on putting the arena here (which is fine), then at least invest in transit that will be able to do the job.

    • Posted by Alex740

      I completely agree, I hope this combined with the presence of the Transbay Terminal will encourage Bart to bring another line across the bay and do some serious expansion of new lines and stations in the city where they are desperately needed.

  3. Posted by P&M

    Sorry to sound flippant, but is it me or does this look like a (top view) toilet with its seat cover down?

    • Posted by oscar

      i wish i could “like” this comment. i didn’t notice it but you’re totally right.

    • Posted by SFCitizen

      I just hope it is a soft close lid. I have soft close lids on my toilets and they are the bee’s knees. Surely they will have a soft close lid on the Warrior’s toilet stadium.

  4. Posted by Marten

    One of the office buildings should be a hotel instead, as was proposed in the Embarcadero design. Some side views of the project would be great too,to see if the design relates to the surrounding area.

    • Posted by gribble

      Across the street is a UCSF parking garage that is nine stories tall. Next to that is a plaza and a student/faculty housing tower that is I believe 15 stories tall. The white parking garage near the Gap/Old Navy i about seven stories tall. The Gap/Old Navy building is I believe five or six tall stories. When I toured it years ago I was struck by the high ceilings on every floor. The buildings along 16th I think are six or seven stories tall.

      The towers and Arena will be larger than most buildings, but not taller than everything nearby. With the office towers on 3rd. I think they will be sized appropriately. UCSF has bought a long thin parcel across from the hospital along 3rd/16th and probably plans some taller office buildings if they can get away with them. I am sure they are happy that the Warriors are going that route first.

  5. Posted by Joseph A

    No issue with the building height given that the developer does not want to suffer any further delays ,

    As for the Offices , could see a communications / media / social company moving in here

  6. Posted by Kate

    Agree – the arena project seems fine. the transit issue is real and needs to be improved concurrently with the arena. The bus improvements for the 30 and 45 along 3rd and 5th are a good start. Looking to see how the 4th and King redevelopment project can integrate this, as well as if and when improvements such as bigger cars can happen on MUNI.

Add a Comment

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