Tom

Just because a single architect wants something does not automatically mean that UPA wants it too. Also, nothing that UA does is outside of what UPA wants. UPA is here to develop the 50 block area around the campus and not dictate what the campus should do. If it weren't for UA, UPA would not exist. UPA is not going to change UA's master plan nor does it intend to. And I will "talk" about this all I want. Doing so is not a personal attack. I think UPA was one of the best ideas Dr. Proenza created as long as it sticks with its mission of developing non-campus areas and not the campus itself.

We all know what the "main architect" said and he is in error. We should not blindly follow another pied piper hired by Akron. He is no different than any other including Rebbecca Ryan. Just because they say it is so, doesn't make it so. And he actually called for "blurring the distinction between the campus and the city". Bogus advise. It is not going to happen. Don't think for a moment that this bogus consultant is not influenced by politicians and the mayor and followers of him. Again, they couldn't care less about The University of Akron. They want to explot UA in order to get what they want in the downtown area in spite of what is good for UA and the region. The obsession with downtown is at best myopic. But, then again, I have always maintained that this view is soooooo Akron.

Let's just pretend the letter of agreement is still in effect. Even so, the wording specifically states that the location of a new arena will be in OR NEAR DOWNTOWN IN A LOCATION THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO BOTH UA AND THE CITY. That gives UA the upper hand especially, when convenient, downtown politicians love to refer to the entire campus as being "in downtown". Bias or not, the city does not get to control UA, nor did it ever own Quaker Square and that is why the campus has flourished. I wish the best for this city, but its progress has paled in comparison to that of the UA campus. And the city sees that and wants to ride UA's coat tales if not rob it outright. Saying so is not a bias, it is stating the obvious historical truth about Akron, Ohio. This penchant by the city of Akron to pretend that we don't have a real university and merely an extension of downtown has been going on for long enough and UA has demonstrated that it will not let it go on any further, The last thing our university and region needs is for the city of Akron to hoodwink UA and the population while it emasculates the campus as a means to rape its holdings in an attempt to claim a campus asset as a city of Akron accomplishment. That has been an Akron MO for a very long time ( see E.J. Thomas Hall) and most astute people can see through that classic Akron game.

Give it up people. You don't know what you are talking about. There will be a new UA arena and it will be built in the heart of the UA campus near InfoCision where it belongs and not downtown. UA has had long range plans to place ALL athletic facilities on the campus within proximity of one another as part of a master plan to have a campus within a campus dedicated to all (not some) multipurpose athletic endeavors. The world class multipurpose arena will be built on the campus with the rest of the state-of-the-art athletic facilities. If you or the mayor want a downtown arena, then you and the mayor can pay for it 100%. End of discussion.

Here is a reply to that audio: LEEFALLS said: MAYOR DON IS ONCE AGAIN BEING HIS POMPOUS SELF! HE TALKS DOWN THE NEW FOOTBALL STADIUM AND CONTINUES TO SAY HE WANTS U OF A TO BUILD HIM A DOWNTOWN ARENA HE CAN USE ON U OF A'S DIME. BET HE DOESN'T TURN DOWN ANY OF THE TAXES THAT WILL BE COLLECTED FROM THOSE PEOPLE WHO GO TO THE FOOTBALL GAMES,EAT,DRINK BEFORE AND AFTER...WHO BUY OTHER THINGS WHEN THEY ARE THERE WHO MIGHT STAY OVERNIGHT ETC...ETC YES IT WOULD NOT BE USED AS MUCH 'POTENTIALLY' AS AN ARENA BUT CANAL PARK ISN'T A YEAR ROUND OPERATION EITHER... I DON'T SEE BASEBALL IN OCTOBER,NOVEMBER DECEMBER,JANUARY FEBRUARY ETC ETC..

Here is a direct quote from the letter of agreement that is now nullified: "If and when a new arena is built to house university of Akron sports teams, including its intercollegiate basketball team, the arena will be built in or near downtown Akron at a location acceptable to the city and the university." We have much legal wiggle room and this agreement doesn't mean squat not only because it is null and void by the fact that it was part of UA running a hotel for two year and now they are running it for longer than that. This agreement is not legally binding because the city has no right or power to force UA from doing what it wants to do. In effect, the agreement is at best a gentleman's agreement and has no legal force. I dare the city to sue UA over a so called violation of this nullified agreement.

No, you are wrong. As part of the Quaker Square deal UA agreed to run the hotel portion for two years which has now been changed to indefinitely, making the Quaker Square deal null and void, especially since UA bought Quaker Square from its private owner, Jay Nausbaum and not the city. Also, you have got the wording wrong. At the time before this "deal" became nullified, UA agreed to build a new arena in or near downtown in a location that is acceptable to the university and the city. I am a member of the city and I am a member of the UA community and I say it goes on campus proper and not downtown.

What a lot of people said was that UA doesn't have room for an on-campus stadium and that it should go downtown. That is the same pessimism being expressed today on this forum when people say that a new UA arena can't/won't be built on the campus. Watch and listen...a new UA multi-purpose arena will go directly on the UA campus proper and not in downtown. It is a downtown arena that won't happen.

feel better now!

The point is that you don't want published that with which you don't agree. Using the word, "speculation" as though doing so is illegitimate on this site is a shell game. We all do it. My speculation is based on some conversation with UA officials and I can tell you this: no one in Buchtel Hall or in any other administrative office at The University of Akron wants to see a new arena anywhere but actually on UA campus proper. Let this be the last word!

Then let them speak for themselves. The improvements you mention are nowhere near a remake of the gym. It is not that old and they need to make improvements on it. That being the case does not rule out an actual arena being built on campus

"Unless someone comes up with some actual news we need to drop the arena talk, again." Your opinion and not a mandate. You don't get to make up the rules We can talk about the arena all we want. The difference between walking from an on-campus arena to pints and downtwon to pints is that Pints and other retail (BW3 and other bars and food places and not just a pawn shop) are that Pints and the other retail are closer to campus and that is where a UA arena belongs. And I never said that my speculation is any better than others. The idea of the arena in this thread was initiated by others. If they can talk about an arena then so can I. And if I want to initiated the discussion on an arena, I will do so. And again, I have it on good word that a new arena is going on campus and not downtown. If the city wants to pay for an arena, then I'm all for it going downtown and that is not going to happen. The UA is going to pay for the arena and it is going on campus. And I congratulate Cleveland State on initiating some improvement but UA has come much further and I don't want to see it turn into the community college that Cleveland State looks like. Not slamming just a fact. I suggest that you stop looking for excuses to quibble this subject and move on. You are starting to make it a personal vendetta and you need to stop it right now. BTW, $300,000 improvement on the current JAR, of which there is no evidence (please show us the link to that claim) , can hardly be called a renovation. UA plans on having both the JAR (not an arena) and an actual arena both on the campus. They won't relocate anything. They will keep the JAR and have an on-campus arena. i think in the medium to long run we will see UA improve itself and the downtown area as well as the region by being true to itself. I'm very optimistic about the future of the campus (which doesn't require as much retail around it as there is downtown, so your argument doesn't float there) and the region. Downtown retail is important as well but it is not a university's main objective to be about local retail. And calling the campus football stadium a flop was uncalled for by one goading poster. That is my speculation and it is no less valuable than the plethora of speculations we see all over this site. We can both agree to disagree, but i think it is a reach for you to state that we should not talk about the arena just because you don't agree with one person's view or knowledge of it.

The JAR already seats 5,500 for B Ball. The downtown arena is not going to happen. It's a done deal. UA will replace the JAR with a 12,000 to 15,000 seat arena on the actual campus and not downtown. I realize what it currently seats. The site lines of those seats (for many) are terrible. Where is the link to this large facility you speak of with a "done deal" comment? Or, am I to assume that Tom=Jake? I agree that the sight lines in UA's JAR physical education building are terrible. However, there is not going to be two arenas in Akron. The only arena will be a University of Akron Arena smack dab in the heart of The University of Akron campus where it belongs and where it will serve the most people and not in downtown where there is already a flop of a baseball stadium. The JAR is a gym and won't be turned into an arena with another arena in downtown. There is no market for both. People are still raving over the location of the beautiful on campus stadium with all the retail, restaurants and bars located around and close to it. I enjoy going to the stadium and the JAR which allows me to be a part of a vibrant pedestrian friendly campus and take advantage of the many bars and restaurants adjacent to the campus. I especially enjoy "Pints" and the other bars and restaurants directly across the street from campus as well as "Virtues" located in City Hospital and if I want to take a short walk i can enjoy House of Hunan and Bricos. What we need currently is a successful football team to live up to a wonderfully located and beautiful football stadium and then a state-of-the-art multipurpose on-campus arena, which I have been assured by those in Buchtel Hall (UA administration) will happen. Not everything in life as an internet link to it. UA will have an on-campus multipurpose arena for B-ball, concerts and other diverse events just like the rest of the campus already hosts on many different scales.

The UA stadium on campus is not a flop. It's the team that is the problem and not the stadium location. A new arena belongs on the UA campus and not downtown because it will be a UA arena and not a city of Akron arena. The UA campus is anything but boring. So many people in and out of the community have agreed that UA campus is the place to be. It is much more like a campus and a beautiful site to behold. The new UA arena belongs on the beautiful UA campus and not downtown where the mayor can claim that it is a city facility just as he tries with E.J. Thomas Hall. Unless, we want to look like Hilltop High again or a version of Cleveland State.

The JAR already seats 5,500 for B Ball. The downtown arena is not going to happen. It's a done deal. UA will replace the JAR with a 12,000 to 15,000 seat arena on the actual campus and not downtown.

Because they struggled to fill the building in it's current state- no one wanted to take the space as large as it was. Although I'm somewhat sad to see it go, this new development will have street-level restaurants and shops, and a small-high rise of living space. Very urban. And Zippo's right...there is a JAR replacement arena in the works for one of the very few spots of vacant land in downtown akron. Surfohio, when was the last time you've been to Downtown Akron? Not going to happen. The replacement for the JAR will not go downtown at all despite the shinanigans of the mayor. UA will build its new arena on the actual campus as it should just like the stadium.

for a bumper sticker free of charge, contact: [email protected] Build The UA Arena ON CAMPUS...Not DOWNTOWN

That would be "Cleveland in the '70s" (not 70's).

As far as additional hotel space is concerned, UA will be running a hotel for an indefinite time and into the foreseeable future. They will not terminate their hotel business at Quaker Square after two years as originally planned. So, with the new "Testa" hotel, downtown should be just fine without any additional hotel space.

UA will offer the land to the Greek Chapters to purchase, but the individual chapters still have to pick up the ball. It can't be a total UA effort. Fraternities and Sororities are actually off campus and non university owned and operated. The Greeks have to be willing to buy the land from UA and build their homes on each parcel. If Greeks choose not to, then UA has stated it will find another purpose for the land.

Couldn't agree with you more. It seems that at one point in time, Akron became obsessed with skywalks and overpasses. The city and university have turned what was once a means to an end into and end in itself. There is nothing wrong with going outside to get from one building to the next, especially on a college campus where one would expect a youthful student population to have no problem negotiating mother nature.

I want to register my objection to the continued existence of an unnecessary enclosed walkway from the JAR to what will be the new College of Education Building. It makes no sense and it is ugly while disrupting what could be a beautiful and flowing sight line in that area of the campus. Rather than giving the campus an integrated look, it screams the opposite. Furthermore, its purpose for existence no longer exists. The two building are no more related than other buildings on campus and the traffic laden street it was originally made to compensate for is no longer in existence. I think overpasses serve to give a disintegrating appearance to the campus. It looks forced and try hard and is disruptive to the natural pedestrian view our campus is trying to achieve. Get rid of it!

UA threw out any thoughts of building pedestrian walk ways over Exchange because they determined that students won't use them. Students would much rather risk it crossing the street where they stand as opposed to walking to the "nearest" walkway. Agree or not, that is what UA decided after consulting with urban planners. And, there are no such considerations nor have there ever been regarding passage ways going under East Exchange. UA is however discussing the possibility of rerouting areas of East Exchange Street. Again, we don't have to agree with or forsee such a thing in order for the people who have the knowledge and authority to consider such a move.

Yes, 22Exchange has nothing to do with UA other than its residents must be enrolled at UA or another public college. Residents can also consist of faculty at UA. Nonetheless it is not a UA facility and certainly not on the UA campus. KSU has a unit like this as well adjacent to its campus. In any event, just because UA uses tax money (and not all the time) does not mean it doesn't have well thought out plans. If ever there was an entity in inner city Akron that knows how to execute a well thought out urban design with beautiful sight lines and pedestrian friendly landscaping, it is The University of Akron. Take a look at Buchtel Commons and Coleman Commons for starters. Those areas were once traffic laden streets that made the campus disintegrated. Also, take a look at what was once Brown Street. Even the black topped area next to the stadium looks far more integrated than the municipal street that was once there. And from that point to the north, Brown Street no longer exists until one gets in the vicinity of Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church and Central Hower. And, I believe that suggestions on how to make Polsky more pedestrian friendly with added retail is a practical and effective direction. Once UA sells it to a private entity, that can certainly become more of a reality. However, I don't think it is in the university's list of priorities nor is it the job of UA to directly enhance downtown retail by continuing to re-purpose an obsolete department store just for the sake of making downtown more inviting. UA's use of the Polsky building is slowly coming to an end as it moves one department after another out and back to the real campus. It's time that a private non-UA entity take over the Polsky building and continue to re-purpose it in the "green" manner that UA started. UA has its landscape for learning efforts to continue so that it ends up looking like a real college campus and not some version of Cleveland State.