SAN FRANCISCO - Golden State Warriors Arena (18,000)

[theskythelimit]

I caught the end of a story on the evening news stating a "group" has started an online petition to stop the development of the proposed Warrior arena.

Anyone have any other info?

No surprise, there will always be NIMBYs, even in Iowa.

[theskythelimit]

Originally Posted by will101

I'm sorry, but I don't buy any of this. Too many negatives, and repeatedly chanting "But it's San Francisco!" doesn't help. This is just some developer's fantasy.
* A $200 million+ lease buyout to move
* ~3,000 fewer seats
* Mass transit is less convenient
* ZERO parking
This will just alienate the 90% of the Bay Area that does not live in SF. There is no way in Hades that the team's value will increase. Unless you buy into the logic that McCourt's seven years of mismanagement caused the Dodgers to increase in value from $430 million to $2.2 billion.

The current ownership would not propose a new arena if they thought there was no money to be had.

Your facts are a little off. There is plenty of public transit in the area and the proposed arena will have its own ferry dock. Just like the successful At&T Park, there will be parking but not to accommodate the capacity of the arena as most people take public transit. The new TransBay Transit Center will be opening around the same time as the arena and will be the Transit hub for the Bay Area.

As for seats, so what. The ownership already said they plan on having up to one hundred extra non basketball events per year. That is where the money is.

It appears you are the only one talking about the lease. No one for sure knows how that is going to pan out.

As for San Francisco as a City, would live no where else.

[will101]

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

K, one point you need the stop using is the "less convenient transit access" Considering its ON a trolley line...

Uh, no. The capacity of BART is about 10 times that of the T line. This means an awful lot of people will have to make a half mile hike from either the Embarcadero BART station, or the Caltrain terminus. And there is the dedicated bridge from the BART station at the Coliseum, another convenience that would vanish if this gets built.

[will101]

Originally Posted by theskythelimit

The current ownership would not propose a new arena if they thought there was no money to be had.

This is the Frank McCourt business model. The only money to be had is in inflating the value of the franchise, and finding some group of suckers to take it off of your hands. The overall revenue will drop as team loses much of their fan base there.

Your facts are a little off. There is plenty of public transit in the area and the proposed arena will have its own ferry dock. Just like the successful At&T Park, there will be parking but not to accommodate the capacity of the arena as most people take public transit. The new TransBay Transit Center will be opening around the same time as the arena and will be the Transit hub for the Bay Area.

AT&T Park has 10,000 parking spaces across the cove, and the Giants have mentioned that the impending loss of most of those spots is a concern. There is no such resource up by Pier 30/32.
As for the ferries, each one holds, what, 100 people? Two of those is a drop in the bucket.
The new Transbay Terminal will be nothing more than a glorified terminus for Caltrain. Oakland is the geographic hub of the Bay Area, and San Jose the economic hub.

As for seats, so what. The ownership already said they plan on having up to one hundred extra non basketball events per year. That is where the money is.

Oh really? With what events? The golden age of rock concerts is long passed. That still leaves a lot of dates to fill. And the place won't be large enough for the ice capades or hockey.

It appears you are the only one talking about the lease. No one for sure knows how that is going to pan out.

I'm the only one talking about it here. The officials in Oakland have mentioned it more than once, and no one knows better than Oakland the nuances of sports leases.

As for San Francisco as a City, would live no where else.

That's obvious, from your "center of the universe" attitude. I am thankful that I get to live in a place that is warmer, roomier and quieter.

[will101]

Originally Posted by SF1977

"ZERO parking" isn't true either.

OK, I admit there are probably close to 300 street parking spaces nearby.

[will101]

Originally Posted by krnboy1009

San Francisco has to be the biggest city in America without a 15000+ arena. Can anyone verify that or correct me?

Nope. Neither San Diego nor Austin have arenas anywhere close to 15,000 seats.

[SVB28]

Originally Posted by will101

Nope. Neither San Diego nor Austin have arenas anywhere close to 15,000 seats.

The Frank Erwin Center in Austin has over 16,000 seats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Erwin_Center

[theskythelimit]

The Giants have approximately 4 thousand parking spaces for a 42 thousand seat stadium.http://mlb.mlb.com/sf/ballpark/direc...ing_tailgating

If the Giants are concerned about losing the spaces, why are hey the lead developer and owners of the planned development of Lots A C and D, where the parking is located.
The Arena will provide 630 direct spots and there is another 2 thousand spaces within a 15 minute walk.
The Arena will hold conventions and other events besides the ice capades. I am sure Peter Guber, founder of Mandalay Entertainment, will have no problem filling up the Arena.

Frank McCourt Former owner of the Dogers? Not sure what he has to do with the ownership of the Warriors. If your insinuating McCourt's model will be used by the current ownershp, that is your opinion.

San Jose the Economic engine? Maybe in the 1990s. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/...-san-francisco

Of course Oakland is thumping about their impending loss and lease agreement. Have not heard too much from them lately, even when the warriors had a press conference last week showing the initial rendering of the new arena.

TransBay Terminal " Glorified", your opinion. As for the Bart Station and Caltrain Staion being ~ 1/2 mile walk? My goodness, what are people going to do, hire a taxi or take a 15 minute walk.

Yes, The South Bay is roomier and quieter, that is why they call it the suburbs. San Francisco is a major urban and densely populated City. To each is own but No centric feelings here.

[BoulderGrad]

Originally Posted by krnboy1009

San Francisco has to be the biggest city in America without a 15000+ arena. Can anyone verify that or correct me?

You start to get fuzzy with what determines a 'city'. San Fran may not have one, but cities in the metro area do. San Diego is a bigger city proper without one but smaller metro area and with no other metro cities with one either.

[murina]

Originally Posted by will101

Nope. Neither San Diego nor Austin have arenas anywhere close to 15,000 seats.

Valley View Casino Center (formerly the San Diego Sports Arena, among other names) Seats 14,500 for basketball. That seems pretty close to 15,000. Viejas Arena seats 12,400 for basketball - is that outside of "anywhere close?"

[will101]

Originally Posted by murina

Valley View Casino Center (formerly the San Diego Sports Arena, among other names) Seats 14,500 for basketball. That seems pretty close to 15,000. Viejas Arena seats 12,400 for basketball - is that outside of "anywhere close?"

My bad. I looked up Valley View on Wikipedia, and just glanced at the 12,000 figure on top, totally blanking that it was for arena football.

[612bv3]

Oh really? With what events? The golden age of rock concerts is long passed. That still leaves a lot of dates to fill. And the place won't be large enough for the ice capades or hockey.

I'm sure some of the concerts that are held in HP Pavilion and the Oracle Arena will move to the city. Even if that doesn't happen, this arena can be used as convention space.

I don't know what you're trying to prove. I'm pretty sure that there is a demand in SF for this kind of venue. Cow Palace and Bill Graham Auditorium are too small and old.

[krnboy1009]

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

You start to get fuzzy with what determines a 'city'. San Fran may not have one, but cities in the metro area do. San Diego is a bigger city proper without one but smaller metro area and with no other metro cities with one either.

Fair enough. I forgot San diego city proper was bigger than San francisco.

I dont think San Francisco even has a arena thats 10000+ San Diego does though.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

i think the LA area hogged all the 10,000 + arenas in California... off the top of my head... Staples Center, Forum, Sports Arena, Ontario Arena, Pauly Pavilion, Galen Center, Honda Center...

Regarding this new arena, i think parking is a non issue. It has been proven in SF that abundant parking is not necessary for success.

[theskythelimit]

Originally Posted by krnboy1009

Fair enough. I forgot San diego city proper was bigger than San francisco.

I dont think San Francisco even has a arena thats 10000+ San Diego does though.

San Francisco never had an indoor arena in the 10K range. The Cow Palace is actually is Daly City. The Bill Gram Auditorium can hold 7K. Interestingly, the Warriors played there in 1964-1966.

[will101]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

i think the LA area hogged all the 10,000 + arenas in California... off the top of my head... Staples Center, Forum, Sports Arena, Ontario Arena, Pauly Pavilion, Galen Center, Honda Center...

Off the top of my head: Oracle Arena (19,600), HP Pavilion and Arco Arena (both around 17,500), Valley View Casino Center (14,500), Cow Palace (13,000), Viejas Arena (12,400), Selland Arena (11,400).

Regarding this new arena, i think parking is a non issue. It has been proven in SF that abundant parking is not necessary for success.

Candlestick Park and AT&T Park both require a lot of it, with (almost) every game sold out at both venues.

[will101]

Originally Posted by theskythelimit

San Francisco never had an indoor arena in the 10K range. The Cow Palace is actually is Daly City. The Bill Gram Auditorium can hold 7K. Interestingly, the Warriors played there in 1964-1966.

The Cow Palace is about 200 feet from the city limit, and nobody really felt put out by not having it closer.

[will101]

Originally Posted by 612bv3

I'm sure some of the concerts that are held in HP Pavilion and the Oracle Arena will move to the city. Even if that doesn't happen, this arena can be used as convention space.

I don't know what you're trying to prove. I'm pretty sure that there is a demand in SF for this kind of venue. Cow Palace and Bill Graham Auditorium are too small and old.

I'm trying to demonstrate that this arena is a bad idea, and very weak in the details. Oracle Arena and HP Pavilion have trouble booking enough events as it is. And as a Warriors fan in the south bay, I think that it would suck trying to get to this place.

[theskythelimit]

Originally Posted by will101

The Cow Palace is about 200 feet from the city limit, and nobody really felt put out by not having it closer.

I am sure the people who live in the single family houses across the street would be put out if their houses were demolished for the Cow Palace. They were built pre 1941 before the Cow Palace.

[will101]

Originally Posted by theskythelimit

I am sure the people who live in the single family houses across the street would be put out if their houses were demolished for the Cow Palace. They were built pre 1941 before the Cow Palace.

That wasn't the point. I've never heard anyone say that SF was lacking an arena, because it was so close to the city limit. This has nothing in any way shape or form to do with the housing across Geneva.