Rays' Ballpark Site Search Still Complicated Braves Will Help Fans With SunTrust Traffic Raiders' Vegas Stadium Financing Remains Complicated Sacramento, Kings To Refinance '97 Arena Loan Facility Notes Proposal Made To Lift Crandon Park Restrictions UNLV Faces Challenges In Sharing Raiders Venue MSG Partners Get Digital Play At NCAA Regionals MLL Bayhawks Want 10,000-Seat Facility Facility Notes
SBD/April 22, 2014/Facilities
Warriors Shift Arena Plans To Mission Bay Amid Political Opposition, Rising Costs
Published April 22, 2014
WANT MORE GREAT STORIES LIKE THIS?
CLICK ON ONE OF THESE BUTTONS
FUELING THE CHANGE: CSNBAYAREA.com's Monte Poole noted Warriors co-Owner Joe Lacob last night conceded that "spiraling costs and political pushback presented too many obstacles to overcome within the desired time frame" for the waterfront site. Lacob said, "It became more difficult and more expensive as time went on. ... We were always -- always -- evaluating Plan B and Plan C." He added of the new site, "We are paying a pretty penny ... but we think it's going to be worth it. We think it's still going to be very, very good. It's got a lot of advantages. And I think it's very doable. And that became a reality that we had to deal with." Lacob said of the new site, "While it isn't as spectacular in terms of its location, it met a lot of other criteria that we thought would be great for the city and great for us, including great public transit" (CSNBAYAREA.com, 4/21). The S.F. Chronicle's Ann Killion said the new site presents a "much more tenable situation" for the team. Killion: "It is closer to freeways. It's closer to public transportation. It would not be years of building." Piers 30-32 were "never going to work." Killion: "They talked a good game, a lot of bluster, but from the get-go everyone said, 'That's not going to happen in San Francisco'" ("Yahoo Sports Talk Live," CSN Bay Area, 4/21). CSNBAYAREA.com's Ray Ratto noted the location change "can be regarded as a mild defeat" for Lacob and Warriors co-Owner Peter Guber. But if the goal was "to secure new digs" for the team, Lacob and Guber have "finally taken the first step they thought they'd taken two years ago." It is "not the bridge-side site they wanted most, but it is also not the site that would have made them unwilling partners with the Giants" (CSNBAYAREA.com, 4/21).
THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS: In San Jose, Tim Kawakamai noted Mission Bay is "not far at all from AT&T Park, so I now wonder if they need to have discussions with the Giants (or have had them) to fully capitalize on the proximity and make sure there aren’t bad overlaps while the arena is constructed" (MERCURYNEWS.com, 4/21). But Ratto noted the Giants probably would not get involved and hinder the building because it is "far enough away" from AT&T Park that the team does not have a "great case to make." Ratto: "Secondly, there really are no ordinances that prevent the Warriors from doing this" ("Yahoo Sports Talk Live," CSN Bay Area, 4/21).