Warriors Mission Bay Arena Concept Design

The cornerstone environmental review for the Golden State Warriors’ proposed arena, retail and office development to rise across eleven acres in Mission Bay is officially underway and the public meeting to discuss the scope of the Planning Department’s report for the project has been scheduled for December 9.

The Department is aiming to finish and release the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the arena development next spring, after which San Francisco’s Planning Commission hearings will commence.

Assuming no major legal challenges or other roadblocks, such as the ballot initiative which effectively sunk the Warriors Piers 30-32 plan, the development’s EIR could be certified in the second half of 2015 and the necessary permits and other approvals secured by the end of the year, which would allow construction on the complex to commence in 2016, construction which will take around two years to complete.

Targeting an opening of the arena in time for the 2018 NBA season, a season which will most likely tip off in late October of that year, the Warriors don’t have too much wiggle room with which to play.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Bay View

    Is there a bay out there somewhere? If so, perhaps a solid wall of multi story buildings obscuring it isn’t the greatest idea……

    • Posted by JWS

      There is a brand new fully landscaped Bayfront Park as part of this project from which views will be enhanced.

    • Posted by psh

      it says Bay/park overlook. It is open to the bay on the east side.

    • Posted by sfgiant

      obscuring it from who? the cars in the adjacent parking lot?

    • Posted by Sierrajeff

      Yeah, the bay view from the current abandoned industrial site is a lot better than this.

    • Posted by Orland

      Typically predictable reflexive, uninformed blather.

    • Posted by formidable doer of the nasty

      NIMBY Tourette’s

  2. Posted by Bat Crazy

    We should probably level all of San Francisco, cut down all of the trees in the Presidio, and sink the eastern waterfront including The Ferry Building, ATT Park, and anything else built on infill land. Down with change, down with man made.

  3. Posted by gone on

    @Bay View. sorry but actually the SocketSiters are NIMBYS. They don’t want a charismatic or serendipitous view of the view from their or anyone elses back yards. There will be a “BayFront” park and you WILL enjoy that prescribed view. Nothhing else. I am happy to have gone on.

    • Posted by Orland

      Farewell. And, good riddance.

    • Posted by Anon

      nobody enjoys the current view. the plan landscapes a lovely view out of what is currently junk.

    • Posted by Fishchum

      “Charismatic and serendipitous view” – is that how you would describe what is there now?

    • Posted by formidable doer of the nasty

      Yeah, I certainly don’t want it to obstruct my splendiferous view of all the unsavory activities going on in and around the parked cars on Terry Francois after dark. And what about the drug dealers and addicts themselves? Are they gonna have to move to Oakland? SF is losing its charisma if we keep building new things.

  4. Posted by MarketSt

    This whole Warriors arena saga is a case study in the dumbing down of San Francisco architecture. From a potentially iconic, architectural statement on the water–high risk but potentially high reward–to a big round building buried between a few buildings–no risk, no reward. City planning by loudest complainers with too much time on their hands.

    • Posted by spencer

      totally agree. the original plan was way better and gave us the opportunity to have world class architecture on the level of the sydney operahouse. This is particularly important for SF, since we have little world class architecture. The new arena could have been the 2nd most important must see sight for tourists behind GGB (in a few years). Instead, people prefer rotted piers and less access to the waterfront that the new park would’ve brought, all in the name of protecting the view of a few uberwealthy people and ensuring that they dont have to deal with traffic a few nights per year.

      [Editor’s Note: The Golden Gate Bridge isn’t the number one “must see sight” for tourists to San Francisco. That honor actually belongs to Pier 39 with over 8 million visitors per year.]

      • Posted by R

        All true, except I will offer this reasoned counterpoint: wall on the waterfront! techies! ellis act!

  5. Posted by formidable doer of the nasty

    Even the developer seems to have lost interest in the new location. When the proposal was for Pier 30-32 we had photo quality renderings coming out the wazoo. This new plan is already at a more advanced stage (EIR) and all we have is wireframes.

    • Posted by Dewayne

      Don’t think they’ve lost interest, just think there was more of push to generate that “Wow” factor with Pier 30-32. Try to win people over with the design because they knew it would be a battle over that location. Everyone seems to be ok with the Mission Bay Site so no need rush out as many designs, they’re coming regardless.

      • Posted by lalala

        Everyone? Don’t be so sure. We’ve got some major traffic/transit concerns over here in Dogpatch/Potrero.

  6. Posted by Hi

    Is the purchase even closed yet?

  7. Posted by Anon

    still looks like a commode. surely the Warriors brass know this?

  8. Posted by Paul

    So what happens to the old stadium in Oakland? Turns into another dilapidated wasteland?

    I understand how this good for the Warriors – and good for San Francisco tax revenue – but it seems like a bad move for the region. A region where economic inequality is already one of the worst in the country.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles