HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2013, 7:01 AM
applejacks's Avatar
applejacks applejacks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65
It's good to see that the state is getting serious about this arena, especially with most of it being outside financed rather than raking over the tax payers.

On a side note, I noticed the people in the rendering seemed to be familiar. Not sure why they used Kendra in their rendering. Is that a normal practice, or just unprofessional?


http://urbaninitiativ3.com/updated-r...new-sf-arena/:



http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/TCaZk...on/PcIRLgkzU2u


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2013, 5:55 PM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is offline
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,440
^^^Is that Kendra Wilkinson and Hank Baskett?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2013, 4:42 AM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 6,993
8 Washington critics take aim at Warriors arena

Quote:
When San Francisco voters resoundingly quashed a high-rise luxury condominium development set for the city's waterfront, they signaled their resistance to the Warriors basketball arena planned for a mile up the road, opponents of both projects say.

These opponents, led by former Mayor Art Agnos, on Wednesday used their election day momentum to call on Mayor Ed Lee to relocate the Warriors arena to Candlestick Point or the Caltrain Station at Fourth and Townsend streets.

The waterfront should be preserved for affordable housing for teachers, artists and others, Agnos said, and if Lee won't budge from what he calls his "legacy project," the same group that defeated the 8 Washington condos will sponsor a ballot measure to defeat the Warriors arena, too, he said.

Lee and the Warriors rejected any comparison between the two projects. The mayor said low voter turnout for an unremarkable ballot says very little about what would happen if the basketball arena were to wind up before voters someday. He added that basketball is a lot more popular and accessible than luxury condos.

"When it comes to the Warriors, I think there will be a lot more people saying, 'Hey, I like that idea,' " Lee said, pointing to the crowds that flock to AT&T Park and the Exploratorium, which are both on the waterfront.

Lee acknowledged that the arena is "no slam dunk, but maybe more like consistent three-pointers."
Arena measure will be on S.F. ballot, but when?

Quote:
The question no longer is whether the Golden State Warriors' waterfront arena will go on the San Francisco ballot - but rather, when it will go on and which side will put it there.

"I think (the Warriors) probably have to," said Mayor Ed Lee. "I think they need to consider that, because everybody is going to want to have a voice."

Temperatures rose on both sides of the arena issue after voters' landslide rejection Tuesday of the 8 Washington condo complex along the waterfront. Leading the opponents, former Mayor Art Agnos zeroed in not just on the height of the proposed 18,000-seat arena at Piers 30-32, but on the 16-story condo project and luxury hotel the Warriors would build across the Embarcadero.

"We do not want height limits busted through," Agnos said. "We do not want this to be used by people with the biggest bank accounts."

The Warriors and their allies are confident that voters like the idea of the arena - but they also know the hotel and condos, which the team says it needs to pay for the deal, aren't nearly as popular.

The team's fear is that, rather than attack the arena directly, Agnos and Co. will go to the ballot first with proposals for new waterfront height limits, or affordable housing on the hotel and condo site, or maybe for a new waterfront master plan that would delay an arena for years or kill it altogether.

Figuring that they can't score when they're playing defense, the Warriors are considering their own ballot initiative. But when?

The next election is in June, and it's likely to have a relatively low turnout. As the Warriors saw with 8 Washington, low-turnout elections tend to have a proportionately higher number of cranky voters.

That would seem to point toward November 2014 as a better option for the team - a general election that will pull a better turnout. But if the Warriors wait until then, they risk having the Agnos forces swoop in with a June initiative.

Which could lead to a repeat of 8 Washington.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2013, 3:56 PM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,106
As long as people actually go out and vote, I'm not worried about the warriors arena getting killed. Polls have already shown that the majority of San Franciscans want the arena.

Last edited by tech12; Nov 10, 2013 at 4:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2013, 7:28 PM
JWS JWS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 86
The waterfront should be preserved for affordable housing for teachers, artists and others, Agnos said, and if Lee won't budge from what he calls his "legacy project," the same group that defeated the 8 Washington condos will sponsor a ballot measure to defeat the Warriors arena, too, he said.

I had to stop and pause to make sure this wasn't an Onion style satire piece. This is unreal. I have to stop following SF development, as much as I love urban planning and architecture, we have to be the ONLY city in America that actively and aggressively fights world class projects like the Warriors Arena.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2013, 8:11 PM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWS View Post
The waterfront should be preserved for affordable housing for teachers, artists and others, Agnos said, and if Lee won't budge from what he calls his "legacy project," the same group that defeated the 8 Washington condos will sponsor a ballot measure to defeat the Warriors arena, too, he said.

I had to stop and pause to make sure this wasn't an Onion style satire piece. This is unreal. I have to stop following SF development, as much as I love urban planning and architecture, we have to be the ONLY city in America that actively and aggressively fights world class projects like the Warriors Arena.
And its not even "the city" that fights these projects, but rather a minority of mostly wealthy NIMBYs who think they're entitled to manipulate the city for their own benefit, and who use fantasy scenarios (teachers, artists, affordable housing!), scare tactics, and lies to con others into backing them...because they know they'd get little support if they admitted it was about preserving their views and property values, and admitted that opposing development will actually make it harder for the poor/middle class to live here (it's great for property owners though!). And of course there's the other minority that simply thinks anything above 4 stories is ugly and bad, and/or think that we live in make-believe land, where literally every single new housing unit must be affordable, even when it's on prime, ultra-expensive waterfront land. And some people will also vote against what the city itself is backing, just because "the government is bad and corrupt".

Meanwhile, the majority of more reasonable city residents who are either supportive or ambivalent to increased development pay less attention to any of it to begin with, don't pay hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars on scary lie-filled propaganda/ballot measures, etc, don't vote, and then we all get stuck with the horrible result.

But, in regards to the Warriors arena, I think that in SF there are enough basketball fans and people who would like a new arena for things like concerts, that once the they hear some people are trying to kill said arena, they'll get off their asses for once and vote to save it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2013, 11:22 PM
tommaso tommaso is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 396
S.F. is the only city that has a basketball culture dating to Bill Russell's glorious 55 game win streak at U.S.F. Basketball is dear to San Franciscans.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2013, 11:55 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,213
The Warriors arena will go to the ballot box, and it will pass. There's no need to fret.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 6:40 PM
JWS JWS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 86
Heard something on 95.7 The Game this morning that a new edition/plan for the Warriors Arena is coming out today...anybody heard anything about this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 7:03 PM
ElDuderino's Avatar
ElDuderino ElDuderino is offline
Droppin' Loads
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ventura, Santa Rosa, California
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWS View Post
Heard something on 95.7 The Game this morning that a new edition/plan for the Warriors Arena is coming out today...anybody heard anything about this?
Quote:
Warriors' S.F. arena plan shrinks again
John Coté
Updated 9:36 am, Tuesday, November 12, 2013

It's lower, slimmer and greener - and still facing a fight.

As opponents vow to put the Golden State Warriors' plans for an 18,000-seat waterfront arena in San Francisco on the ballot, the team has put its design on a diet.

The changes, which have been in the works for months, include lopping 15 feet off the edge of the roofline, increasing the amount of public open space and lowering the public plazas to create a gradual slope of greenery that the NBA team likens to a smaller version of Dolores Park on the water....



Full article: http://www.sfgate.com/warriors/artic...#photo-5450488
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 7:20 PM
minesweeper minesweeper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 586
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 5:25 AM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 824
More renderings from Socketsite. I really love this design - It needs to happen!









Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2..._warriors.html
NBA presentation: http://www.nba.com/warriors/sf?venue
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 5:46 AM
tommaso tommaso is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 396
Basketball is the Bay's greatest inspiration for architecture! Look what we're creating here on our waterfront!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2013, 4:44 PM
mdsayh1 mdsayh1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NewYork, San Francisco
Posts: 61
This is such an inspiring and avant garde project. I'm very worried it will run into trouble in the box office. Political marketing is so good at confusing t]voters who show up to vote but don't research what they are casting a vote on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2014, 7:36 PM
Enigmatism415's Avatar
Enigmatism415 Enigmatism415 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdsayh1 View Post
This is such an inspiring and avant garde project. I'm very worried it will run into trouble in the box office. Political marketing is so good at confusing t]voters who show up to vote but don't research what they are casting a vote on.
We just have to band together and publicly promote this project even more strongly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2014, 8:34 PM
theskythelimit theskythelimit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigmatism415 View Post
We just have to band together and publicly promote this project even more strongly.

This is my thought also, if the NIMBYs can band together, so can the Pro development groups. It is not good to be complacent when it comes to voting. Everyone should exercise their right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2014, 6:55 PM
JG573 JG573 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Portland
Posts: 159
I can not understand how people could oppose such a project it blows my mind. I found the anti-warriors arena Facebook plus website and it is painful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2014, 5:24 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 1,660
ballot bust?

not sure this is the place for this, but...

another little wrinkle in the height-limit ballot saga: may be illegal to wrest authority from the city and let local voters decide in these waterfront cases.

reasoning: the City is supposed to make decisions over the waterfront on behalf of the entire state, because the latter entity ultimately holds such lands in public trust. the local population does not get sole say.

if I get their counter-argument, the measure proponents say that the local population would be carrying out the public trust protection duty themselves, so still legal.

another angle on the argument against: you can't take away power from the BoS (which the measure would do) without amending the City charter.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2014, 6:07 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
^I hope those interpretations turn out to be correct because I fear this project dies if that ballot measure is approved. It won't kill it directly, but it will mean this has to be approved at the polls, and I don't think that ends well for the Warriors.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2014, 7:08 PM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut gallery View Post
^I hope those interpretations turn out to be correct because I fear this project dies if that ballot measure is approved. It won't kill it directly, but it will mean this has to be approved at the polls, and I don't think that ends well for the Warriors.
I dunno. Multiple recent polls show that over 60% of SF residents are in favor of the arena getting built at pier 30/32. Of course there's still plenty of time for the NIMBY propaganda machine to go into overdrive and suck more supporters in, and there's the problem of most people not bothering to vote in SF (while the NIMBYs always vote)...but then there's also the whole thing about local voters restricting height limits on public/state waterfront land being potentially illegal--and again, over 60% of the city does support it as is. So I think there's a decent chance it will be built.

But maybe the Warriors will find a good spot in Oakland and end up building a new arena there instead of dealing with all this crap in SF. And now I'm having deja-vu...I swear i had a dream years ago where that exact thing happened.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:21 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.