JAR Study Coming Up

[scottditzen]

Just got this from the urban ohio forums:

Recently Released:

James A Rhodes Arena Feasibility Study

The A/E will provide recommendations to The University of Akron for improvements at James A Rhodes Arena. Modifications will include improved sight lines, revisions to seating configuration for enhanced fan experience, premium seating accommodations, improved concessions, novelty, & ticketing as well as team facilities, offices and operations support. Solutions may include renovation and expansion of the existing arena, or demolition and construction of a new arena if modification of the existing facility is not practicable. Relocation costs (interim or permanent) for affected departments will be included in the feasibility study. A comparative analysis of the site and related project costs will be included in the study.

This can be found on the U of A - Construction Public Bid Advertisements and Results webpage. Proposals are due in the middle of July.

urbanohio

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/....html#msg562598

[ZachTheZip]

We're pouring money into renovating the back area as we speak and we're already looking to tear it down?

I say it stays and we build a new arena elsewhere. The JAR is home to too much stuff; most of the athletic offices are there and where would we play while the new arena is getting built if the JAR is torn down?

[Hilltopper]

Looks like one of our favorite posters on ZNO, about the arena project, has made lots of friends on that message board.

[scottditzen]

Looks like one of our favorite posters on ZNO, about the arena project, has made lots of friends on that message board.

But wait....it's a different name....unless....wait a minute!! Ha ha.

Anyhow, I am totally perplexed by this development.

Why would you tear it down, unless maybe you're just going to rebuild on site?

[skip-zip]

We're pouring money into renovating the back area as we speak and we're already looking to tear it down?

I say it stays and we build a new arena elsewhere. The JAR is home to too much stuff; most of the athletic offices are there and where would we play while the new arena is getting built if the JAR is torn down?

Although I wasn't a math major, I think this one amounts to some easy addition.

Renovations already being done to old classroom area PLUS seriously looking into more renovations EQUALS we're going to be playing in the JAR for quite a bit longer.

Can I extend my orignial prediction that it will be at least 10 years before we see a new arena?

[Zip Watcher]

Renovate it to become a comfortable band box with seating right on top of the floor. Make it a harder place to play than it already is. Give the students straight shot sections from floor up .. when they fill them .. give additional space down low on the sides by the corners.

Make it small tight .. with better bathrooms and more concessions (upstairs).

Then go out and hang a banner ... the place can become one of the most feared arenas around. We need top flight facilities in the back of the house, and improvements in the front .. not a new arena.

Go Zips!

B) B)

[g-mann17]

Cities, states, and universities do feasibility studies to do "due dilligence". That way when they make the decision to build something new, they can say "We looked into it, and it would cost too much".

You can't do a concourse in the JAR. You can't add luxury seating without significantly reducing the seating that currently exists. You can't expand it (not that we need it bigger, but to add loge/president suites it would need to be bigger to maintain current size).

All I'm saying is, we did a feasibility study on the Rubber Bowl, we have Infocision, we did one for the Law School, and we are going to build a new Law School, we did it for Gallucci Hall and the Grant Street High Rise, and all of that is going to be replaced.

This a "due dilligence" study.

You need luxury suites for program investment, you need new sightlines so that TV coverage looks better. This will result in saying that the JAR isn't up to par for basketball and can't be renovated to meet fan expectations.

[scottditzen]

^ valid points. Though I still don't understand why they chose this wording:

Solutions may include renovation and expansion of the existing arena, or demolition and construction of a new arena if modification of the existing facility is not practicable.

Maybe it was written, or more likely edited in a hurry. But it sounds like it pre-supposes a limited amount of choices.

a. renovate and expand

or

b. demo and construct new

It just seems much more logical that if you're right, and the JAR just can measure up through renovation, this building should nevertheless remain in use for the students and the community.

[xu9697]

Seems to me like the renovations that are going on will be a selling point for building a downtown arena (or it at least could be spun that way).

"We have beautiful meeting rooms, video rooms and practice court at the JAR...which is a very close proximity to our student-athletes. We have recently sunk a good deal of $$$ into these areas and feel they are a huge asset to our program. However, we also feel that the arena itself is not conducive to where our program is and where it is headed. We felt that a downtown location..."

[Captain Kangaroo]

Renovate it to become a comfortable band box with seating right on top of the floor. Make it a harder place to play than it already is. Give the students straight shot sections from floor up .. when they fill them .. give additional space down low on the sides by the corners.

Make it small tight .. with better bathrooms and more concessions (upstairs).

Then go out and hang a banner ... the place can become one of the most feared arenas around. We need top flight facilities in the back of the house, and improvements in the front .. not a new arena.

Go Zips!

B) B)

I used to be a proponent of a bigger arena, but something around 6k-7k max seems about right.

I think our attendance will rise appreciably if we can just guarantee people a nice seat rather than a wooden bench.

[g-mann17]

^ valid points. Though I still don't understand why they chose this wording:

Solutions may include renovation and expansion of the existing arena, or demolition and construction of a new arena if modification of the existing facility is not practicable.

Maybe it was written, or more likely edited in a hurry. But it sounds like it pre-supposes a limited amount of choices.

a. renovate and expand

or

b. demo and construct new

It just seems much more logical that if you're right, and the JAR just can measure up through renovation, this building should nevertheless remain in use for the students and the community.

Well I would say the key to that is the use of "may". Its not "solutions are reno and expand or demo and construct" it may include any or all of that. Renovate and construct are included in that. They could say that expansion isn't impossible but you have to demo the current athletic offices and all class rooms so that a concourse can be built around it. There are lot of possibilities created by the use of "may". They just created the start and end of the spectrum. Its up to the bidders to come up with the best solution.

It really depends on what the University and Athletic Departments needs are. A new arena downtown means they need practice facilities on campus, a new arena on campus means they could build a new office facility in it.

[skip-zip]

Cities, states, and universities do feasibility studies to do "due dilligence". That way when they make the decision to build something new, they can say "We looked into it, and it would cost too much".

You can't do a concourse in the JAR. You can't add luxury seating without significantly reducing the seating that currently exists. You can't expand it (not that we need it bigger, but to add loge/president suites it would need to be bigger to maintain current size).

All I'm saying is, we did a feasibility study on the Rubber Bowl, we have Infocision, we did one for the Law School, and we are going to build a new Law School, we did it for Gallucci Hall and the Grant Street High Rise, and all of that is going to be replaced.

This a "due dilligence" study.

You need luxury suites for program investment, you need new sightlines so that TV coverage looks better. This will result in saying that the JAR isn't up to par for basketball and can't be renovated to meet fan expectations.

I see alot of "can't" and "need" in here. We can whine all we want about not having the things we want, but replacing an arena right now that was built in the 80s is a long shot. Absolutely no comparison whatsoever to the Rubber Bowl situation.

[ZachTheZip]

Cities, states, and universities do feasibility studies to do "due dilligence". That way when they make the decision to build something new, they can say "We looked into it, and it would cost too much".

You can't do a concourse in the JAR. You can't add luxury seating without significantly reducing the seating that currently exists. You can't expand it (not that we need it bigger, but to add loge/president suites it would need to be bigger to maintain current size).

All I'm saying is, we did a feasibility study on the Rubber Bowl, we have Infocision, we did one for the Law School, and we are going to build a new Law School, we did it for Gallucci Hall and the Grant Street High Rise, and all of that is going to be replaced.

This a "due dilligence" study.

You need luxury suites for program investment, you need new sightlines so that TV coverage looks better. This will result in saying that the JAR isn't up to par for basketball and can't be renovated to meet fan expectations.

I see alot of "can't" and "need" in here. We can whine all we want about not having the things we want, but replacing an arena right now that was built in the 80s is a long shot. Absolutely no comparison whatsoever to the Rubber Bowl situation.

That's why I think we keep it around whether we build a new one or not. It's still a perfect size for WBB and Volleyball.

[g-mann17]

I see alot of "can't" and "need" in here. We can whine all we want about not having the things we want, but replacing an arena right now that was built in the 80s is a long shot. Absolutely no comparison whatsoever to the Rubber Bowl situation.

I think you miss the point. We all agree that the JAR doesn't meet the needs of the team, or the fans. Memorial Hall was built in 1954 it was determined in 1977 that it no longer fit the needs of the school. It was to be replaced by a 10,000 seat coliseum style arena. In 1983 the JAR was built. The JAR is now older than Memorial hall was when it was replaced. It never met fan needs, it barely met athletic department needs. Also the JAR and Memorial Hall existed linked together for years.

You have more momentum now then in the past because women's b-ball is doing well and the men have a chance at the tournament every year.

I'm just saying that if the school was bent on renovating, the RFP would have been for bids to improve the arena and not a feasibility study on the costs of replacing it. This is step one in a 4 year ordeal to replace a bad outcome from 30 years ago.

[Blue & Gold]

Cities, states, and universities do feasibility studies to do "due dilligence". That way when they make the decision to build something new, they can say "We looked into it, and it would cost too much".

You can't do a concourse in the JAR. You can't add luxury seating without significantly reducing the seating that currently exists. You can't expand it (not that we need it bigger, but to add loge/president suites it would need to be bigger to maintain current size).

All I'm saying is, we did a feasibility study on the Rubber Bowl, we have Infocision, we did one for the Law School, and we are going to build a new Law School, we did it for Gallucci Hall and the Grant Street High Rise, and all of that is going to be replaced.

This a "due dilligence" study.

You need luxury suites for program investment, you need new sightlines so that TV coverage looks better. This will result in saying that the JAR isn't up to par for basketball and can't be renovated to meet fan expectations.

+1

Btw, good find, Scott. Thank you.

[Blue & Gold]

I think our attendance will rise appreciably if we can just guarantee people a nice seat rather than a wooden bench.

Even if we do absolutely nothing at all but add chairback seating, it would be an enormously positive step. I am "only" 38, but can hardly stand up straight after a game on those bleachers.

[Roo]

I don't goto many bball games because of the JAR. It is just a horrible place to watch a game. I sit in the bleachers and a portion of the court is cut off by the railing, it's uncomfortable, and it feels like a high school game. It is just a very poor experience for anybody wanting to actually watch basketball.

That being said, they shouldn't tear it down. A downtown arena in a partnership with the city, would be ideal. That way, Akron could benefit by getting shows and what not in that arena, the Zips could have a state of the art arena that would help take the program to the next level. The JAR would still be used for offices and practice because of the location, but volleyball and WBB could still host their games there.

Also keep in mind, the Cleveland Cavs recently lost their NBDL team and are looking to purchase a team and relocate it to the area, currently they are looking in the Youngstown area, but they not be able to accommodate another minor league team (the arena currently hosts hockey.) Building a new arena may be a good selling point to have that team housed in Akron.

It only makes sense to build a downtown arena....

[skip-zip]

Wow....a lot of good thoughts here. There's never a lack of interest in talking about this topic. Here's more....

g-mann...thanks for the data comparing the age of the JAR, and the age of Memorial when it was replaced. However, if you were on campus at that time, the condition of Memorial in the early 80s was light years away from the condition of the JAR right now. Don't ask me why.

We always need to keep in mind that the Rubber Bowl vs. New Football Stadium choice became a much easier choice when it got to the point where it could be justified economically. And the Rubber Bowl went through plenty of renovations in the decades before that happened. Other than the chairback seats in the West upper level, and a new court, has anything significant ever been done to the inside of the playing area of the JAR?

How much does the new football stadium and soccer field really push the new basketball arena even further into the future?

It sure seems to make sense that a City/U of A joint venture could make it economically justifiable, but I am not sure how long it would take for the parties to get past all of the "who will pay for what" issues.

I like Blue & Gold's point about chairback seating throughout the arena. I've been to other arenas that are completely chair back, like our West bleachers, across their entire upper level. But, how much would seating confort increase attendance? Could we expect at least a few hundred more people to suddenly take an interest in Zips Basketball simply because of a more comfortable seat? If so, it should have been done a long time ago.

One of my biggest complaints about the JAR is that you enter the building at the BOTTOM of the arena instead of at mid-level. What were they thinking? Those folks that are going to be sitting in the top of the bleacher sections have one heck of a journey up to their seats.

We could certainly push this issue along if we started packing the JAR. It's still a mystery to me why a D-1 basketball program with 6 straight 20+ win seasons, MAC titles, and NCAA tourney appearances draws only 2,000-something to many of its games, in a heavily populated area, even if they were playing in a total dungeon of a basketball arena.

[Dr Z]

Also keep in mind, the Cleveland Cavs recently lost their NBDL team and are looking to purchase a team and relocate it to the area, currently they are looking in the Youngstown area, but they not be able to accommodate another minor league team (the arena currently hosts hockey.) Building a new arena may be a good selling point to have that team housed in Akron.

more on the subject

[Captain Kangaroo]

Also keep in mind, the Cleveland Cavs recently lost their NBDL team and are looking to purchase a team and relocate it to the area, currently they are looking in the Youngstown area, but they not be able to accommodate another minor league team (the arena currently hosts hockey.) Building a new arena may be a good selling point to have that team housed in Akron.

more on the subject

Wait until Dan Gilbert sees what he has to deal with in Youngstown...

[g-mann17]

It sure seems to make sense that a City/U of A joint venture could make it economically justifiable, but I am not sure how long it would take for the parties to get past all of the "who will pay for what" issues.

I would say they have been ironing that out since the Quaker Square deal. They toured Toledo's arena (UA and the City, and rep's from First Energy and some other undisclosed individuals) over a year ago now.

I don't think the stadiums push anything back. Donors and Cub Cadet paid for the soccer stadium improvements. The Info was a capital project and they still are getting donors to cover some of that. But that would be the same as saying "how much does all the new buildings push the stadium back". It really didn't.

This whole thing started when the Info was built.

As for improvements to the JAR, new court, chairback seats for the lower sections, score board, locker rooms. They have put probably $2 million in it to get it to where it is now. Probably as much or more renovation as the Rubber Bowl saw.

[scottditzen]

I think our attendance will rise appreciably if we can just guarantee people a nice seat rather than a wooden bench.

Even if we do absolutely nothing at all but add chairback seating, it would be an enormously positive step. I am "only" 38, but can hardly stand up straight after a game on those bleachers.

Agree 100 percent. I'd hate to sound like a cranky 39 year old, but you are so right, the bleachers are awful. And you couldn't pay me to sit in the nice seats in the lame, quiet zone area lol.

I'm with Roo. The JAR fan experience is so bad I (and several friends) just haven't been too tempted to make the one hour drive south. Instead I've been simply waiting for the Q games, which the atmosphere and game experience has been very good.

The basketball program is at a critical place right now. Whatever happens with JAR or a new arena, I just hope that UA can put their best foot forward and somehow get people more excited about going to games. We need all of Ohio to be convinced that our program is truly going for something greater.

[skip-zip]

It sure seems to make sense that a City/U of A joint venture could make it economically justifiable, but I am not sure how long it would take for the parties to get past all of the "who will pay for what" issues.

I would say they have been ironing that out since the Quaker Square deal. They toured Toledo's arena (UA and the City, and rep's from First Energy and some other undisclosed individuals) over a year ago now.

I don't think the stadiums push anything back. Donors and Cub Cadet paid for the soccer stadium improvements. The Info was a capital project and they still are getting donors to cover some of that. But that would be the same as saying "how much does all the new buildings push the stadium back". It really didn't.

This whole thing started when the Info was built.

As for improvements to the JAR, new court, chairback seats for the lower sections, score board, locker rooms. They have put probably $2 million in it to get it to where it is now. Probably as much or more renovation as the Rubber Bowl saw.

Whoa!! I'm sure the officials at the U would be rejoicing if they had only put 2 million into the Rubber Bowl. We put that much into it to keep it operating over just those last several years alone. It cost millions every time we did nothing more than just replace the artificial turf.

What's sad is that everything that was ever done to the Rubber Bowl in the 30 or so years that I've been going there was hardly noticable

[ZachTheZip]

It sure seems to make sense that a City/U of A joint venture could make it economically justifiable, but I am not sure how long it would take for the parties to get past all of the "who will pay for what" issues.

I would say they have been ironing that out since the Quaker Square deal. They toured Toledo's arena (UA and the City, and rep's from First Energy and some other undisclosed individuals) over a year ago now.

I don't think the stadiums push anything back. Donors and Cub Cadet paid for the soccer stadium improvements. The Info was a capital project and they still are getting donors to cover some of that. But that would be the same as saying "how much does all the new buildings push the stadium back". It really didn't.

This whole thing started when the Info was built.

As for improvements to the JAR, new court, chairback seats for the lower sections, score board, locker rooms. They have put probably $2 million in it to get it to where it is now. Probably as much or more renovation as the Rubber Bowl saw.

Whoa!! I'm sure the officials at the U would be rejoicing if they had only put 2 million into the Rubber Bowl. We put that much into it to keep it operating over just those last several years alone. It cost millions every time we did nothing more than just replace the artificial turf.

What's sad is that everything that was ever done to the Rubber Bowl in the 30 or so years that I've been going there was hardly noticable

It cost at least $2 million every time they had to pump concrete under the endzone sections because the natural spring that is under the hillside kept eating away at the shale and sandstone bedrock that was supporting the structure.

[Dr Z]

Construction Inside Rhodes Arena Continues to Move Forward

The two team lounges will be symmetrical and feature state-of the-art technology, including multi-screen audio/visual equipment for practice and game video analysis, and opponent scouting. The video systems, designed specifically to meet the needs of the Akron basketball programs, will be synchronized with equipment located in the existing coaching staffs' offices to maximize efficiency in video study and game preparation.

The project is scheduled to conclude in late-July.

source