SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   SAN FRANCISCO | Golden State Warriors Arena (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=199507)

tech12 Apr 12, 2015 5:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew2109 (Post 6986951)
Will the type of fans change? Like the Oracle is in Oakland...this will be in SF.

Why would the fans change? They're the Bay Area's basketball team, and are only moving across the bay (which is where they were before they were in Oakland, for the record).

Gordo Apr 12, 2015 5:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tech12 (Post 6987542)
Why would the fans change? They're the Bay Area's basketball team, and are only moving across the bay (which is where they were before they were in Oakland, for the record).

Sure, but I think that you will see a change in the fans attending the average game. I'll definitely go to more games with the team in SF just because of convenience. It's not super hard to get to the current location, but the added benefit of being able to walk somewhere for food/drink before/after the game is a huge plus for me, and probably means at least 5-6 more games a year.

SF born and RAISED Apr 12, 2015 9:31 PM

Fan base changes with new home
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by tech12 (Post 6987542)
Why would the fans change? They're the Bay Area's basketball team, and are only moving across the bay (which is where they were before they were in Oakland, for the record).

It definitely changes the fan base. With the Warriors winning these couple of years, I've been priced out of so many games. Prices were only $40-50 a seat a few years back, now go for $100+. Moving into a brand new stadium only will jack up the prices more like Levi's Stadium.

tech12 Apr 13, 2015 1:51 AM

Good points...but is that really the fan base changing? The people who go to games may skew more wealthy due to rising ticket prices, but most fans who can't afford to go to the games anymore will still watch them on TV or go to a smaller number of games when they can afford it. I doubt your average warriors fan in Oakland or San Leandro will stop rooting for them just because they move back to SF, just like your average fan back when they were in SF didn't stop rooting for them when they moved to Oakland.

tech12 Apr 29, 2015 4:04 PM

What the hell...this fucking city...

NIMBYs are trying to kill the arena again:

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...rena-plan.html

patriotizzy Apr 29, 2015 4:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tech12 (Post 7008525)
What the hell...this fucking city...

NIMBYs are trying to kill the arena again:

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...rena-plan.html

To be fair, there is a medical center right across the street.

pizzaguy Apr 30, 2015 9:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tech12 (Post 7008525)
What the hell...this fucking city...

NIMBYs are trying to kill the arena again:

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...rena-plan.html

They have no ground to stand on. It's gonna be privately financed on private land and is well within the height restrictions.

viewguysf Apr 30, 2015 6:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patriotizzy (Post 7008557)
To be fair, there is a medical center right across the street.

Yes--calling them NIMBYs is a simplistic answer when there's much more to it than that. I've always questioned this location and would like to have seen it along the Embarcadero or on the Giant's land south of the stadium. UCSF and the medical center want room for future expansion and research facilities, the main reason that Mission Bay was started in the first place. Don't get me wrong though--I'd love to have that arena in San Francisco.

thedudley Apr 30, 2015 9:04 PM

I mean, it's a stadium/arena in SF. No matter where you put it, it's gonna be next to something. 50,000 seat Kezar Stadium sat right next to St. Mary's hospital and nobody seemed to have a problem with that.

If UCSF wanted to expand to that plot of land in the future, then they should have bought that land. It belonged to Salesforce before the Warriors bought it.

But let's actually analyze the argument that's being brought against the project. "There will be too much traffic because there is not enough parking at the arena (950 spaces for 18,500 people)." So they want more parking so that more people will drive there? It's bass-ackwards thinking.

WildCowboy Apr 30, 2015 9:06 PM

UCSF is publicly distancing themselves from this group and saying they are pleased with negotiations with the Warriors and the city about ensuring emergency vehicle access. They're likely downplaying any more overt internal opposition, but seems completely reasonable they want to ensure access to the hospital during high traffic events. They'd be neglectful if they didn't make sure there were plans and infrastructure in place to handle it.

The group of donors wants that land available for UCSF, but UCSF hasn't expressed interest in or a need for it.

thedudley Apr 30, 2015 9:10 PM

Something tells me that a lot of people will take the central subway to the game once that line is finished. and considering the arena wouldn't open for another couple years at the earliest, they should coincide nicely.

For those that are curious, here is the Warrior's plan to mitigate gameday/event traffic: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...ssion-bay.html

WildCowboy May 1, 2015 3:09 AM

Benioff and Conway, who between them have given UCSF $240 million for its hospitals, are blasting the arena foes.

viewguysf May 1, 2015 4:41 AM

This will hopefully blow over since the City, Benioff, and Conway are all pushing back hard. Plus, can you imagine a hospital more difficult to get to than the new CPMC Medical Center being built? Van Ness, Franklin, and Geary are usually busy, and Post will become that way.

One thing though, I wouldn't compare St. Mary's Hospital to UCSF Mission Bay. It isn't just the hospitals (which eventually will double in size when the next phase is built); it's also the campus research and other facilities. I can well see that some people would want to keep land available for expansion, but as WildCowboy and thedudley pointed out, the university itself hasn't expressed interest in it, nor did they buy it.

mt_climber13 May 1, 2015 4:51 PM

You guys can come use our new arena in downtown Sacramento.

a very long weekend May 1, 2015 5:32 PM

man, i can only imagine the angry phone calls marc benioff is making this week at the very highest levels.

the tinfoil theory that explains why it's coming out of nowhere: coliseum city developers and people near the mayor of oakland are behind this.

pizzaguy Sep 19, 2015 8:48 PM

New video

http://www.sfgate.com/warriors/artic...at-6506120.php

peanut gallery Oct 7, 2015 7:00 AM

Some big news coming out tonight. UCSF will now endorse the Warriors new arena, taking some of the wind out of the sails of the opposition. From the SF Business Times:

Quote:

With a $10 million-plus fund for potential traffic issues and other safeguards, the leadership of the University of California, San Francisco — whose Mission Bay campus sits across from the proposed arena, office and retail project — now officially endorses the project, Lee said Tuesday.

The endorsement is a big win for the Warriors and Lee, who sees the return of the Warriors to San Francisco after more than 40 years in Oakland as a signature project. It also undercuts the ability of the opposing Mission Bay Alliance to use UCSF's previously lukewarm reception to the Warriors' plans as a tool to drum up opposition.

---------

But UCSF Chancellor Sam Hawgood signing off on an endorsement moves the institution from tacit approval to a full-on OK of an 18,050-seat arena in time for the tipoff of the 2018-19 season. The alliance continues to say, however, that the development would overwhelm Mission Bay with traffic and block access to UCSF hospitals.

---------

The agreements — one creating a dedicated transportation improvement fund, the other setting a "special circumstances cap" that requires last-resort limitations when there are overlapping events at the arena and the San Francisco Giants' AT&T Park, less than a half-mile down Third Street — would provide the "safeguards UCSF needs to fully endorse the Warriors' arena project," Hawgood said.

The fund would be fed by at least $10 million to spend annually on possible solutions to traffic problems through the life of the arena, Lee's office said. That could be used for four new light-rail cars dedicated to serving the arena — and available at other times to augment general Muni light-rail service — new, expanded light-rail platforms for the T-Third line serving Mission Bay, and a plan to keep certain streets clear of event traffic for UCSF, local businesses and residents.

The money would come from revenue generated by the Warriors' arena.

WildCowboy Oct 7, 2015 1:27 PM

And yet, the opposition is just going to "fight harder" for someone who doesn't want their protection.

tech12 Oct 7, 2015 9:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WildCowboy (Post 7189273)
And yet, the opposition is just going to "fight harder" for someone who doesn't want their protection.

Because as usual, what it's really about is selfish NIMBYs who want their views to always be 100% the same, their personal parking situation to never change, their property values to only ever go up as much possible, their own personal opinions on "beauty" and "character" to be accepted as universal fact, etc, etc. With a splash of misguided fools suckered in as support, who think it's about affordability, or hospital access, or saving the environment or something.

I know I'm preaching to the choir, but :yuck:

peanut gallery Oct 7, 2015 9:17 PM

This will at least take away one of their fake altruistic arguments.


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.