Skip to content

Warriors put plans for new building on pause. Maybe for a long time.

Feb 4, 2014, 2:57 PM EDT

Warriors San Francisco Arena

From the start the new Golden State ownership was ambitious, wanting to build a new arena on the water in San Francisco, moving out of their current Oakland home. And from the start, critics questioned the timeline (the Warriors wanted to play there in 2017), the cost and whether the project could ever even get approved.

Now, the Warriors have hit the brakes for a year on the project, reports the San Francisco Chronicle.

“It’s about getting it right, not about getting it done fast,” said Warriors President Rick Welts.

In the past 20 months, the team has produced three rough designs in an attempt to come up with one palatable to its prospective waterfront neighbors and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, which must approve the deal. In the meantime, cost estimates for preparing Piers 30-32, on which the arena would sit, have doubled to $180 million.

There is also an opposition group expected to have enough signatures on a petition to force eventual plans for the arena — and surrounding residential and retail development — to be put to the voters. Opponents complain about both the height of the arena and the plans for large luxury condominiums nearby.

Getting any kind of major development approved in California is not easy, there is always some opposition. Put that development on the coast and there are a series of extra local and state hoops to jump through, ones designed to not let the California coastline become a playground of only the rich.

I wouldn’t say the plan for the new arena is dead, but the Warriors are realizing they need to step back and reassess everything to make this an eventual reality. It can’t be railroaded through.

  1. asimonetti88 - Feb 4, 2014 at 5:11 PM

    “Getting any kind of major development approved in California is not easy, there is always some opposition”

    They are also in San Francisco. Anyone who has tried to do business in the City can tell you it is incredibly difficult with all the regulations and bureaucracy they’ve developed there.

    • sportsfan18 - Feb 4, 2014 at 6:50 PM

      One big Democratic state…

      • asimonetti88 - Feb 4, 2014 at 10:44 PM

        One of the great things about this state is its diversity. For example, Orange County, where I live, is consistently one of the most conservative and Republican leaning counties in the country, and home of famous conservatives like John Wayne and Orly Taitz (unfortunately on the second one).

        To say the state is one big Democratic state is stereotyping and incorrect. Even though we have leaned Democratic in presidential elections, the state politics are still diverse. We’ve recently had Republican governors like Arnold Schwarzenegger, and vote conservatively on propositions, voting against legalized marijuana and gay marriage.

      • Kurt Helin - Feb 5, 2014 at 8:55 PM

        I’ll back this up as a CA resident. There are a lot of Republicans here (although they tend to be more socially progressive and environmentally friendly than in deep red states) and issues are not simple. To use gay marriage as an easy example, there was a high Democrat African-American turnout to vote for Obama in the election that was on the ballot but that African-American demographic tends to have more socially conservative christians, so gay marriage failed that time. In the case of San Francisco, it is heavily Democratic but the fact is even Democrats are wary of more traffic and tall buildings that block their ocean view — that’s not a left/right thing.

  2. dinofrank60 - Feb 4, 2014 at 6:23 PM

    Jack London Square is the way to go for the Oakland Warriors.

  3. adoombray - Feb 4, 2014 at 6:28 PM

    “Opponents complain about both the height of the arena and the plans for large luxury condominiums nearby. ”

    This is a major problem. It’s not the arena, it’s what they’re really building it for – those sweet sweet luxury condo’s and the property value it would raise. Prokhorov didn’t build Barclays for the Nets he did it to cash in on the area around it when the property values suddenly skyrocket.

    The San Francisco Waterfront would be ruined with high rises that close to the water. The high rises in that city sit more in, you know, the city. The piers retain their charm by being relatively simple while you look BACK at the high rises. What was once a really pleasant stroll to find some amazing food and relax would ruin yet another San Francisco neighborhood where the property values are already so high that you need to clear 6 figures to live in something larger than a shoebox.

    If it was just the arena, it would have broken ground already, that’s not a California or San Francisco thing. That’s an ownership group trying to juke a town into more cash – but the bay area already knows how to deal with that because of Al Davis.

  4. thekingdave - Feb 4, 2014 at 11:45 PM

    Might want to take another look at that comical bloated valuation released during the summer.

  5. Dogsweat - Feb 5, 2014 at 12:25 AM

    Seattle will take them.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Will LeBron get booed Christmas Day in Miami?
Top 10 NBA Player Searches
  1. K. Love (3924)
  2. D. Rose (3825)
  3. T. Young (2729)
  4. L. James (2693)
  5. K. Bryant (2684)
  1. K. Irving (2606)
  2. E. Bledsoe (2115)
  3. G. Hayward (2073)
  4. A. Davis (1981)
  5. R. Allen (1903)