SkyscraperPage Forum

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

OhioGuy May 22, 2012 7:18 PM

SAN FRANCISCO | Golden State Warriors Arena
 
Warriors to build new arena, move back to S.F.

SFGate.com
Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Tuesday, May 22, 2012


Quote:

The Golden State Warriors are jumping across the bay, with plans for a privately financed, $500 million waterfront arena that would allow the team to play its home games in San Francisco for the first time in more than four decades.

The NBA franchise would leave Oakland for a 17,000- to 19,000-seat arena that would be built on Piers 30-32 near the foot of the Bay Bridge, a short walk from downtown, and open in time for the 2017-18 season.

"It is going to happen - let there be no doubt," Warriors co-owner Joe Lacob said Monday.
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/20...0111089780.jpg

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/20...0111181139.jpg

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/20...0111090014.jpg

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/20...0111090020.jpg

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/20...0103648748.jpg

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/20...1337659092.jpg

Crawford May 22, 2012 7:28 PM

How can you build an arena on top of a pier?

I mean, it could be done, but you would need a massively reinforced new pier, and you certainly couldn't do it for $500 million. A conventional urban arena on "dry land" costs upwards of a billion.

It would be very cool if it could be done, but I would guess this would cost bare minimum $1.5 billion in 2012 dollars when all is said and done. That's serious cash, but they're VC guys, so maybe they don't mind it.

The Barclays Center in Brooklyn costs a little over $1 billion, and has no radical engineering issues. The MSG renovation in Manhattan (which is really only a temporary stopgap until they eventually relocate) will cost nearly $1 billion.

Xelebes May 22, 2012 7:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 5709212)
How can you build an arena on top of a pier?

I mean, it could be done, but you would need a massively reinforced new pier, and you certainly couldn't do it for $500 million. A conventional urban arena on "dry land" costs upwards of a billion.

It would be very cool if it could be done, but I would guess this would cost bare minimum $1.5 billion in 2012 dollars when all is said and done. That's serious cash, but they're VC guys, so maybe they don't mind it.

The Barclays Center in Brooklyn costs a little over $1 billion, and has no radical engineering issues. The MSG renovation in Manhattan (which is really only a temporary stopgap until they eventually relocate) will cost nearly $1 billion.

Edmonton is building a top-of-the-line arena for less than 500 million. Our cost of labour is likely higher and spottier than in SF.

Xelebes May 22, 2012 7:48 PM

I moved the thread since the discussion has turned rather quickly to only the arena. You can link to a new thread about only the relocation of the Golden State Warriors in the Skybar.

mt_climber13 May 22, 2012 8:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xelebes (Post 5709226)
Our cost of labour is likely higher and spottier than in SF.

And what would make you say that?

fishrose May 22, 2012 8:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 5709212)
How can you build an arena on top of a pier?

I mean, it could be done, but you would need a massively reinforced new pier, and you certainly couldn't do it for $500 million. A conventional urban arena on "dry land" costs upwards of a billion.

It would be very cool if it could be done, but I would guess this would cost bare minimum $1.5 billion in 2012 dollars when all is said and done. That's serious cash, but they're VC guys, so maybe they don't mind it.

The Barclays Center in Brooklyn costs a little over $1 billion, and has no radical engineering issues. The MSG renovation in Manhattan (which is really only a temporary stopgap until they eventually relocate) will cost nearly $1 billion.

There have been several new arenas constructed within the last 10 years that cost FAR less than $1.5 billion in 2012 dollars.

Xelebes May 22, 2012 8:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakamesalad (Post 5709256)
And what would make you say that?

Edmonton has major trade shortages, most of it tied up in multi-billion dollar upgrader projects and work in Fort McMurray. Wages typically start 35 dollars an hour on these projects so they have quite the draw.

spyguy May 22, 2012 8:21 PM

A conventional basketball arena does not cost a billion dollars. Amway Center in Orlando is only two years old and was less than $500 million.

NOPA May 23, 2012 12:03 AM

I'm really excited this is happening! It helps take the sting out of the 49er's move, and a basketball arena is much better for the city in general because it opens up a number of entertainment options that the city didn't previously have (just imagine the Madonna concerts here!).

Gordo May 23, 2012 1:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xelebes (Post 5709269)
Edmonton has major trade shortages, most of it tied up in multi-billion dollar upgrader projects and work in Fort McMurray. Wages typically start 35 dollars an hour on these projects so they have quite the draw.

Average construction labor in the Bay Area is probably quite a bit more than that for a project like this (in other words, not a project that can use undocumented labor). Being on state-owned port property they'll likely have to use all union labor, which could quickly rise to double that or more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishrose (Post 5709267)
There have been several new arenas constructed within the last 10 years that cost FAR less than $1.5 billion in 2012 dollars.

None of those arenas were built on a 100 year old rotting pier in a seismic zone on the shore of one of the most expensive urban centers in the country though. They've still got multiple years of lawsuits to get through (an arena blocking some views of the Bay? Dozens will be filed, many by folks with very, VERY deep pockets).

All of that said, I like this idea and location - hope it happens. I'm just skeptical at this point.

minesweeper May 23, 2012 1:22 AM

Those renderings look much better than I expected. It’s a spectacular location for an arena. Still, even with the entire SF political machinery behind the project, it’s going to be an uphill battle to get all the approvals.

I imagine the Warriors will have to grease the wheels a bit to get their approvals. Tossing some money to affordable housing, public transportation, wetlands restoration, etc. will probably be necessary to get a project like this approved.

FYI, the Warriors have posted ridiculously high resolution images of those drawings online (images are 25-40 MB each):

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...ing1_HiRes.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...ing2_HiRes.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...ing3_HiRes.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...ing4_HiRes.jpg

Rail>Auto May 23, 2012 5:51 AM

I love this concept and am glad the Warriors are moving back to SF and are picking a bay view location.

My only complaint is the renderings. The Warriors kept druming it up like it was going to be architecturally significant. Although it has a nice open glass view on the one side, this looks to be a basic arena that would be in the lower tier of the NBA if it weren't on the pier. I hope these are just basic outlines/ place holders for a better design.

Overall, great work. What will happen to Oracle Arena after 2017? Will the Warriors give up the territorial rights to Oakland if another team were to want to relocate there?

OhioGuy May 23, 2012 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rail>Auto (Post 5709932)
What will happen to Oracle Arena after 2017? Will the Warriors give up the territorial rights to Oakland if another team were to want to relocate there?

Will another team be interested in relocating to Oakland, particularly when other sports franchises appear to be leaving? And if there are any available NBA teams, might they head up the coast to Seattle? Or maybe to the nice new arena in Kansas City? Inland Empire? I'm guessing the Warriors wouldn't be particularly interested in any Bay area competition either.

OhioGuy May 23, 2012 1:22 PM

Warriors face many hurdles in building S.F. arena

SFGate.com
Heather Knight,John Coté
Wednesday, May 23, 2012


Quote:

It's yet to be seen whether this particular production will be a feel-good story, as the Warriors and city officials pledge, or a heartbreaker like so many previous efforts to develop the 13-acre patch of crumbling concrete and pilings just south of the Bay Bridge.

Lack of money and frustrations with the politics of San Francisco have sunk at least five previous efforts, some with major players behind them like Oracle billionaire Larry Ellison, who backed out of a plan this year to build on the piers as part of the America's Cup sailing race deal.
Quote:

The Port of San Francisco estimates the piers will be condemned in 10 years if not dramatically overhauled, but that's exactly what the Warriors have in mind to support their new stadium: a $75 million to $100 million repair job on the pilings supporting the piers and a brand new surface on top of it.

An iconic, high-tech arena, retail center, restaurants, parking garage and public park space is estimated to cost an additional $500 million - all to be privately financed except for the handover of the piers and an adjoining lot across the Embarcadero from the city to the team on long-term leases. The combined value of those properties - with Piers 30-32 in usable condition - was about $55 million, according to city officials. But in its current state, the piers have a negative value, they said.

Ellison's loss may prove beneficial to the Warriors because the team now has access to the Oracle co-founder's extensive engineering studies done on Piers 30-32, which were provided to the port, and to thousands of pages of public documents produced last year for the environmental impact review of the America's Cup regatta that include analyses of the piers' physical condition, animal species in the water and traffic issues. Guber and Warriors co-owner Joe Lacob say they're fully aware of the condition of the piers and will soon be putting out a bid to fix them.

topota May 23, 2012 1:36 PM

fantastic that this project would be done, maybe some Olympic games in the future could be in the city. :fireworks

plinko May 25, 2012 4:32 PM

Given the location, I'd like to see something a bit more iconic in the roof shape, but otherwise a great project in terms of infrastructure. They should have game day ferries as well from other piers and east bay locations.

...not that I actually believe that this will get built in the next 10 years...

1977 May 25, 2012 5:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plinko (Post 5712902)
Given the location, I'd like to see something a bit more iconic in the roof shape, but otherwise a great project in terms of infrastructure. They should have game day ferries as well from other piers and east bay locations.

...not that I actually believe that this will get built in the next 10 years...

This is more of a massing study to show how it relates to the pier and the city in general. I don't think an architect has even been hired, so there should be a lot of changes in the coming years.

Also, I heard on the radio that a ferry dock will be part of the plan.

peanut gallery May 25, 2012 7:37 PM

^That's what I've read as well. These aren't real designs at all. Just some sketches to get the imagination going.

I'm with Gordo on all of this: very excited, but also very dubious. They have Coastal Commission, Bay Commission, Port of SF and city approvals to get through. Not to mention the residents of the area who are already voicing concerns about traffic, parking, views, access, etc. I think their timeline is a fantasy, but if they can tough it out through a laborious approval process, they might get there some day.

An arena would be a great adjunct to the convention center (for larger events). For example, Oracle would no longer need to run busses out to TI for their OpenWorld parties. Unfortunately for Oakland, the arena that bears that corporate name will suddenly find itself getting skipped for much more than just basketball games if this happens. Many of the acts that normally use it will shift those over to this arena instead.

As for building on piers, I've read that they need about $100M of work to be ready to build upon and the arena should cost about $500M on top of that. Not sure if it's mentioned above somewhere, but the Warriors are also after the parking lot across the street, which is currently zoned for residential. That would certainly help offset some of the cost for them.

edsg25 May 28, 2012 4:19 PM

personally I'd rather have seen the 49ers build a stadium in the area (perhaps on the Giants' parking lots across the bridge, south of the ballpark....and send the Warriors to Santa Clara.

No team has ever been so attached to and so much about San Francisco as the oldest (by far) professional franchise in the west, the 49ers.

1977 Aug 26, 2012 4:15 PM

Snohetta was chosen to design the new Warriors arena! I have high hopes for this one.


Quote:

The Golden State Warriors have selected the fast-rising firm Snøhetta as design architect for the arena that the team seeks to open in 2017 on Piers 30-32, just south of the Bay Bridge. And, according to Snøhetta co-founder Craig Dykers, the two immense projects have more in common than meets the eye.
"There's an interesting set of connections between these two worlds of culture that hasn't been fully explored," Dykers said last week. "They share a similar need to attract people in such a way that they feel comfortable in various settings, from large groups to individuals."
Snøhetta will be paired with the San Francisco office of AECOM, an international firm with broad experience designing sports facilities. The firms were chosen independently and have yet to begin work on the arena project, which also includes 2.3 acres on the inland side of the Embarcadero. Dykers said he hopes an initial design will be ready for release within the next two months or so.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/place/...#ixzz24fYteGEH

peanut gallery Aug 26, 2012 4:50 PM

That is very promising! I like their work. In other news, the Port Commission has set-up a community advisory committee to ensure neighbors of the project are involved and heard. Hopefully, that will help keep everyone happy while keeping the project on track. Here's the website if you want to keep abreast of the community-involvement process.

easy as pie Aug 27, 2012 1:30 AM

it'll be a tall order to compete with barclays center in brooklyn, but i'm pretty confident that we'll get an audacious design from the scandinavian team, which would go a long way to silencing the doubters. think of it: for a crew like snohetta, this is a career-making opportunity to create a globally-iconic building. sure, moma is huge, but this is something that could show up in elementary school textbooks in yemen if it's good enough. one can only assume that these folks will go to the styx and back to deliver an iconic design for us.

SLO Aug 27, 2012 8:23 PM

I love the project and it stretching activity along the embarcadero, and that location with a great design would be stunning. Cant wait to see it....

peanut gallery Aug 28, 2012 4:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peanut gallery (Post 5811113)
...the Port Commission has set-up a community advisory committee to ensure neighbors of the project are involved and heard. Hopefully, that will help keep everyone happy while keeping the project on track.

Ugh, scratch that. I just read that Sue Hestor was at the first meeting. Forget about this being productive in any way and prepare for nonsensical lawsuits. I didn't see her name on the committee roster, but she was quoted in a Matier & Ross article.

1977 Oct 15, 2012 11:33 PM

New specs and renderings were unveiled by Snohetta today:

http://www.nba.com/warriors/sf?venue

easy as pie Oct 16, 2012 1:32 AM

http://i.imgur.com/65b87.jpg

a few immediate thoughts:
1) hard to see the ferry stop, one would hope that it'd be better integrated or dropped completely, given that the ferry building is itself in such close proximity;
2) massing for the buildings on the opposite triangle are obviously designed to placate opposition from that quarter, and we already know that there'll be quite a large number of parking spaces there, pleasing neighbors immensely, even if it's all wrong;
3) the small building footprints and insane amount of plaza/public space are smart, very much what people want from the waterfront and greatly lessening the load the city backers will have to carry to push it forward;
4) the design is intelligent for this town: if it were super flamboyant, there'd be opposition on the basis of overly iconic and waterfront-changing grounds, if it weren't fairly spectacular, the movers would have trouble getting the plebs behind it. it strikes just the right balance.
5) finally, the white/gray theme is interesting in the context, not particularly consistent, it'd be interesting to see how this one pushes the waterfront forward (exploratorium and the cruise ship terminal were/are just depressing).

Rail>Auto Oct 16, 2012 6:23 AM

I don't have a problem with the area around the arena itself. I especially like the kayak and canoe loading area. But as far as the arena itself goes, that was a complete letdown. It looks like they tried to use a Cowboys Stadium futuristic design and ended up with the BOK Center in Tulsa. Would have liked to have seen something much better.

fflint Oct 16, 2012 7:38 PM

More renderings from sfgate's article:

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/15/55/74.../3/628x471.jpg

http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/15/55/74.../3/628x471.jpg

http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/15/55/74.../3/628x471.jpg

ElDuderino Oct 16, 2012 8:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rail>Auto (Post 5868200)
I don't have a problem with the area around the arena itself. I especially like the kayak and canoe loading area. But as far as the arena itself goes, that was a complete letdown. It looks like they tried to use a Cowboys Stadium futuristic design and ended up with the BOK Center in Tulsa. Would have liked to have seen something much better.

While I like the design of the arena, that is not the final design. This round of design was mainly used for planning how the area will be laid out. Detailed design work for the arena is still to come. Read the full article for a more detailed description.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/place/...ng-3951484.php

ElDuderino Oct 16, 2012 8:29 PM

More details and better pics from WILLYGTO1 at SSC

Quote:

Originally Posted by WILLYGTO1 (Post 96416530)
The preliminary design concepts of the Warriors San Francisco venue were unveiled today in coordination with the official architect team of Snøhetta and AECOM.


Venue Footprint: 170,000 square feet

Venue Height: 135 feet. For reference, AT&T Park is 183 feet to the light standard, 132 feet to the top of the seating bowl

Venue Seating Capacity: 17,500. For reference, the capacity of Oracle Arena is 19,596

Venue Total Square Footage: (excluding practice facilities and meeting rooms): 740,000 square feet

Practice Courts: 21,000 square feet

Community Event Room: 10,000 square feet

Parking Spaces: approximately 630. Piers 30-32 currently parks 1,500 cars

Retail: 105,000 square feet

Open Space: 333,000 square feet

Open Space as Portion of Total Site Area: 333,000 square feet out of 548,500 square feet. The Warriors are committed to no less than 50 percent of the site being dedicated to open space

Maritime Uses: Ferry landing, fire boat/fire station facility (accommodating three fire boats), water taxi landing, kayak docking

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...015_farout.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...5_interior.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...5_exterior.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...15_topdown.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...wnlabelled.jpghttp://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...sitMap_425.jpg


NYguy Oct 18, 2012 8:35 AM

Fantastic location...


http://archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=6306

Unveiled> Golden State Warriors Arena
Snohetta and AECOM reveal conceptual scheme for dramatic waterfront facility in San Francisco




http://archpaper.com/uploads/snohetta_sanfran_04.jpg



http://archpaper.com/uploads/snohetta_sanfran_06.jpg

tech12 Dec 8, 2012 7:50 PM

Apparently the Giants are now against this arena going in at piers 30-32. So lame:

Quote:

Everybody loves the Giants. They won the World Series twice. They built the beautiful ballpark that jump-started SoMa. And they attract more than 3 million fans a year.

They aren't just a baseball team. They are civic leaders.

Now they need to start acting like it.

When the team began to snipe at plans to put a basketball arena for the Warriors on the vacant, run-down Piers 30-32, we chalked it up to off-season crankiness. But now it is clear the Giants are actively discouraging the project.

That's not what they are saying, of course. Team spokeswoman Staci Slaughter says we've got the wrong idea.

"The Giants support the building of an arena for the Warriors in San Francisco," she said in a statement. "It is important, however, that the facility and site be thoroughly studied and planned so the project can function properly for the neighborhood and the city as a whole."

Their position is that is took them years to find the right location for the ballpark. Now the Warriors are rushing the process through. But in the 1990s, when the Giants' facility was on the drawing board, there were several sites to choose from. Now those have been filled with development. There simply aren't that many spots for an arena that might take up 5 acres or more.

Giants suggest Pier 50
Asked where they'd suggest, the Giants floated the idea of Pier 50, which is south of the ballpark, away from downtown, and off the busy Embarcadero corridor. Safely, in other words, away from AT&T, which would still be the center of the SoMa universe. (Oh, and if the Giants get their waterfront village built on parking lot A, basketball fans would be funneled right through their commercial village to go to a Pier 50 arena.)

It is hard to believe the Giants can raise some of these objections with a straight face. When they were planning what is now AT&T Park, all the familiar concerns were raised: a downtown facility would be a traffic nightmare, neighborhoods would be ruined, and the noise and congestion would be intolerable. The Giants battled through those perceptions, built a jewel of a ballpark, and won nearly everyone over.

But now that they are established in the neighborhood, the Giants have suddenly gone NIMBY, using the same congestion/traffic/public transit arguments....

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/nevius...#ixzz2EUXxAg6h

blackcat23 Dec 10, 2012 7:04 PM

Really don't like this design, although the location is incredible. Just looks like an amorphous metallic blob. Considering what a great view of the bay this would eprovide, I'd like to see the interior windows look more like the earlier rendering:

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0522...nt_gb1_600.jpg

I hope they alter the hell out of this one.

peanut gallery Feb 14, 2013 4:49 AM

Snøhetta architect Craig Dykers discusses his design concepts for the new Warriors arena on YouTube.

Not a lot of new info, but interesting to hear his thoughts on the architecture.

aquablue Feb 14, 2013 5:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackcat23 (Post 5932470)
Really don't like this design, although the location is incredible. Just looks like an amorphous metallic blob. Considering what a great view of the bay this would eprovide, I'd like to see the interior windows look more like the earlier rendering:

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0522...nt_gb1_600.jpg

I hope they alter the hell out of this one.

That design looks very nice!

JDRCRASH Feb 14, 2013 7:07 AM

I was wondering when this would happen. And it looks like it might! :)

timbad Feb 14, 2013 8:57 AM

agh, it sounds like a lot of what he talks about is now having to be re-worked

peanut gallery Feb 14, 2013 5:39 PM

^Yeah, especially the views of the Bay Bridge from the south that they were trying to frame between the buildings. But I do like the idea of a back-up cruise ship terminal, which also could improve ferry docking as well. If it enables the approval from the Coastal Commission, it will be worth the delay.

NOPA Feb 14, 2013 10:26 PM

I liked the location of the arena so I hope the design still turns out great. But if moving it means we get more stakeholders on board then I guess that's what it takes.

I'm predicting this will be the NIMBY shitshow of the decade. They gotta come out with all guns blazing.

biggerhigherfaster Feb 14, 2013 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOPA (Post 6015305)
I liked the location of the arena so I hope the design still turns out great. But if moving it means we get more stakeholders on board then I guess that's what it takes.

I'm predicting this will be the NIMBY shitshow of the decade. They gotta come out with all guns blazing.

Meh, I'm a bit optimistic. There aren't that many "NIMBYs" in that area since it's fairly new. Lots of ppl who are new to SF and more traffic and commerce in the area would tend to raise property values. Plus, the arena doesn't really block views.

I do think that public transit and traffic in that area needs to be improved ASAP if they want an arena there. Embarcadero -> NBA arena -> MLB stadium -> 4th Caltrain station, along with tons of high rise and mid-rise condos along the way means a ton of traffic

Rail>Auto Mar 1, 2013 9:03 AM

So is this still the final plan for the design or is it still just a placeholder? I'm also curious when the Warriors will release interior photos of the court area.

NOPA Apr 17, 2013 6:24 PM

New group just launced to SUPPORT this epic arena. I think this could potentially be the NIMBY shitfit of the decade, and I intend to personally spend time to make sure this masterpiece gets built (and also end the long and annoying treks to the Oracle Arena and HP Pavillion for concerts).

http://sfappeal.com/2013/04/group-la...arriors-arena/
http://www.warriorsonthewaterfront.com

viewguysf Apr 19, 2013 7:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOPA (Post 6094762)
make sure this masterpiece gets built (and also end the long and annoying treks to the Oracle Arena and HP Pavilion for concerts).

Yes--we really need a cool place for concerts in the City--an arena has definitely been missing from the scene and this could be one of the best!

pizzaguy May 5, 2013 1:13 PM

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/21/34/43...e_headline.jpg

Quote:

And - taking a cue from the archways fences at AT&T Park that let fans watch games for free from the outfield - the arena architects have yanked out 750 seats to add a 25-foot-wide glass curtain on the walkway that would allow people to peer inside during games, albeit probably with a limited view of the floor.

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/21/34/43...rpiecewide.jpg
http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/m...#ixzz2SQK5dYKc

ardecila May 5, 2013 9:36 PM

I love the cladding but I'm skeptical they can actually get that tiled look.

1977 May 6, 2013 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6116857)
I love the cladding but I'm skeptical they can actually get that tiled look.

I think it's possible. Here's another building (WTC Pavillion) by Snohetta:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/3222417...3759/lightbox/

I'm not saying it's exact, but it definitely looks possible.

1977 May 6, 2013 5:03 AM

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...505-10-925.jpg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.ele...0505-9-925.jpg

More below:
http://www.nba.com/warriors/sf?venue#_

viewguysf May 6, 2013 5:09 AM

I'm totally drooling--it's super sexy--please let it happen!! :worship:

mt_climber13 May 6, 2013 5:23 AM

Wow that is beautiful- Go SF!!

patriotizzy May 6, 2013 5:31 AM

It's a piece of art, public space, an arena, and a destination. LOVE the design.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:58 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.