Tom

It's also true that Polsky itself does basically nothing for the pedestrian-friendliness of the area; walking past it on Main feels like walking past a small fortress. That is all I meant by calling that particular area (The Polsky Building) hopeless. It is next to impossible to make it into anything more warm and inviting. Also, contiguous vs non-contiguous is really not my point. The Polsky Building is obviously part of a downtown metro appearing, non-campus area. Afterall, it was once a department store and still looks like one on the exterior. At best, it is seen as an annex to the authentic campus (the students hate it because it makes them feel like step children when forced to use it) and is being used temporarily for low priority academics and storage of archives which is also temporary. I look for UA to unload the place...the sooner the better! While UM has four distinct campuses, each is contiguous in itself and there are distinct functional purposes for each of the four. Each of the four look like and are actual campuses. The same can't be applied to the Polsky Building as it relates to the UA campus. The Ann Arbor campus is divided into four distinct areas – North, Medical, Central, and South Campuses. Located about two miles away from Central Campus, North Campus contains the College of Engineering as well as the Schools of Music, Art, and Architecture. The Medical Campus includes the renowned University of Michigan Hospital and Medical School. Central Campus is the main area, with the Diag, classroom buildings, most residence halls, and close proximity to (and not in) downtown Ann Arbor. South Campus is also known as the Athletic Campus, and it holds UM’s athletic arenas, including the famous Michigan Stadium. Go Blue!

I think you will be pleasantly surprised at UA's abilities regarding urban planning. Remember how buildings looked butted up against what was once Buchtel Ave and Carroll Streets? Also, take a look at what used to be Brown Street now running along side of the stadium, rec center, and blending into the area around the JAR and Olin Hall. UA has plans for what is now Spicer Street next to the newest residence hall as well as for all the slumish houses east of Spicer. So, I wouldn't be so quick to condemn UA's knowledge of Urban Planning. I think you will like what you will see. As far as the Polsky Building goes, that's not really campus anyway. Besides, that area is hopeless. It's part of downtown and it's going to stay that way, especially after UA vacates the building.

"UA's high-minded gallery opens" Little by little we will see UA moving departments out of the archives currently in the Polsky Building. This is just one of more to come.

I think the area you mention is just west of UA's law school and south of UA's performing arts hall. From what I've learned, that area is slated for a new law school since C. Blake McDowell is under serious scrutiny and must expand if not rebuild. Law School Renovation and/or Addition - Feasibility and Site Selection Study "The Associate will provide options to The University of Akron for modifications to the school of law building. All options will reflect architectural character compatible with recently completed buildings on The University of Akron Campus. The exterior of the building will feature masonry, glass and aluminum elements to match other new University buildings. The project will include approximately 120,000 square feet. Several site configurations (up to five) requiring different building solutions will be studied by the Associate. Solutions may include renovation and expansion of the existing law school, or demolition of existing buildings. Relocation costs (interim or permanent) for affected departments will be included in the feasibility study. A comparative analysis of the sites and related project costs will be provided by the Associate. Final architectural design and site selection will be approved by The University of Akron, Department of Capital Planning and Facilities Management. " UA moves forward with plans for new law building By Carol Biliczky Beacon Journal staff writer POSTED: 06:54 p.m. EST, Dec 16, 2009 http://www.ohio.com/news/79453982.html I saw the plans and UA has chosen to rebuild the law school just across the street west of the existing law school. Also, the fact that UA may become a more residential campus is not all that germane to attracting a large number of students to large events. UA students can drive their cars back to campus and fill up a facility as they have done for years. They don't have problems driving to the Q or other places far away. If it's worth it, they'll drive back to their own campus. The trick is to give them what they want to see. Other people drive to campus for what they want to see. What makes a UA student any different? Cleveland State has The Wolstein Center on its campus. I believe it seats between 12,000 and 15,000 and they don't have any dorms on their campus currently. All in all, It's still good to see UA become more residential. And, the only logical place for a new UA arena is near the remaining sports, recreation and physical education facilities already on campus such as the stadium, Jackson Fields and Rec Center.

I know full well who you are and I maintain that whether you are an administrator or a moderator, you are out of line with your own insults and disrespect. You have a hostile and condescending tone that implies that the only people deserving of respect are those who agree with you. Again, you confuse respect with agreement. It was you or your moderator who labeled me a "jerk" and a "tool". That is in no way an appropriate manner in which to operate a blog.

Bottom line : you just disagree.

Living in Gin: I must take issue with you. You are a moderator and judging by your postings, you really should not have such a position. Your need to post juvenile pictures mocking me and calling me a jerk makes you guilty of the very things of which you accuse me. Someone needs to hold you accountable for your irresponsible handling of this site. You take things much too personally and basically retaliate against posters with whom you disagree. Please refrain from calling me a jerk and labeling my dissension as disrespect of a moderator. You are entitled to no more respect than the rest of us. I suggest you take a look at your own lack of respect for others. Having assigned authority does not entitle you to show disrespect towards others or acting juvenile.

This takes a little longer but it is a different angle:

Here ya go!

memories of memorial hall on the UA campus...gone future site of the new college of education building

Personally, I think this is just smoke and mirrors. I think he actually has MORE issues with UofA now, but can't show it. Why? Well, University President Louis Proenza's dramatic transformation of the University gives him the aura of being able to make big things happen quickly, something the Don hasn't been able to do. This isn't a shot at the Don, actually, UofA had the advantage of being relatively large University shoehorned in the center of a Midwestern, rust belt has-been of a town. It has undergone the transformation by accumulating a mountain of debt and taking over the vacant and underutilized areas near campus. The University started its massive building program by razing many of the old buildings on campus and replacing them with dramatic results. This bolstered UofA and president Proenza as the community saw what a huge difference a few nice shiny buildings did to a very compact campus. The Don obviously approved of all of this as it made the downtown look a whole lot better. President Proenza then started the University Park Alliance with Summa, got some big grants from the Knight foundation and got some things rolling with some private proposals and actual construction projects just off campus This only added to the UofA's sway in downtown and, of course, The Don approved. Now, here's where it get interesting. Due to all the construction and excitement generated, UofA's enrollment was steadily increasing. An edict a few years earlier that all freshmen must stay in the dorms meant that there wasn't any room to house all the students so UofA started to expand off campus. Dr. Proenza, all but finished with his "New Landscape for Learning", looked for the next feather in his cap. The obvious choice was the crumbling (literally) Rubber Bowl 7 miles from campus. An on campus stadium would put the spotlight on UofA for another 3 years, but UofA was now landlocked. The location for the new stadium would require that 2 dorms be demolished and UofA would need a lot of housing quick. Under The Don's nose, UofA cut a deal to purchase Quaker Square, taking a Downtown Akron landmark and major hotel off the table. The Don was furious and to appease him, UofA gave part of the land back to the city for the future use for a new hotel. UofA's influence over downtown grew when a developer for South Main Street proposed a major redevelopment on the corner of Main and Exchange, which was centered on private, off campus housing for students. Unlike most proposals, this one actually materialized and you can see the results above. In addition, the proposed move of NEOCOM to Akron, linked to UofA, potentially gives the University more control of land near downtown. In the end, UofA has slowly been eroding The Don's control of Downtown and I think he really resents this. He can't show it because the East Side of Downtown is completely overhauled, there are lots of young people in the city and a brand spanking new stadium is opening in just over a year. The downtown of a city is its showcase, and after many years of involvement, UofA just waltzes in and, with a blank checkbook, takes over. Dr. Proenza has generated amazing results and as a result, his influence of what happens around the University is huge! Obviously I'm a huge fan of UofA, but I also try to see things realistically. UofA has done amazing things for the city, but they are WAY over extended and I think they need to focus on improving the education and not on building new sports facilities. The Don has also done amazing things. Look at Canal Park and the deal he put together to keep Goodyear in Akron! That deal alone is as big as all of the construction that has gone on at UofA. If he can keep Firestone in Akron he will have accomplished what few other Mayors of major Ohio city’s have been able to, actually expanding the white collar workforce of the old guard manufacturing giants! I think this battle has just started between Proenza and The Don for control of Downtown Akron. Dr. Proenza seems to be able to pull things out of a hat, while the Don has also done some amazing things in the past 15 years as well. It's only going to get more interesting. Excellent analysis, zipsrifle. It shows that you have real data that goes beyond personal speculation. Eventually, we will see UA develop even further and while it will continue to have a major impact on downtown, if not the only impact, it will not "take over" downtown in the direct way many like to think it will. Proenza has assured us of this. The agreement between the city and UA over a downtown arena is not as black and white as some have illustrated. The original agreement did not commit UA to putting an arena downtown. The exact language was, "in downtown or close to downtown in a location that is acceptable to the city and the university" (remember, the city of Akron and the ABJ and county government all consider UA's on-campus football stadium as being in downtown, so there is a lot of wiggle room for what may be dubbed a "downtown arena"). Also, this agreement hinged on UA owning and operating a hotel (Quaker Square) as a favor to the city for only two years. As most may know that hinge (term) is now null and void since UA has now owned and operated the hotel longer than two years and will continue to do so for the "foreseeable future" making the whole agreement null and void.. Also, even though many believe that UA took Quaker Square off the table, the truth is the owner, Jay Nausbaum took it off the table when he attempted to sell it to UA on two other occasions. No one else wanted to buy QS, so UA took it off Jay's hands and prevented another Akron facility from shuttering itself. UA did not give the city any land aquired through the QS purchase. Instead UA made a land trade with the city. This involved a portion of QS parking and the site of the former Urban League. However, I believe that deal is no longer in effect as well. While we all want to see the university and downtown work in tandem, it is true that there continues to be much animosity toward UA coming from downtown and specifically the mayor. He wasn't booed by the crowd on opening day at InfoCision for nothing. Doc Proenza has his eyes on the big picture and will not let city hall push him around as it wants to do. It is sad that it is this way but the flip side is that we have a university president who is more than reasonable with downtown while knowing that UA has a commitment to the greater good. All in all it is exciting to see UA excel and the consequential growth of the downtown area. I like seeing how downtown benefits in a collateral and natural way from UA's progress. In my opinion, it is a more authentic and lasting way for a downtown area to grow and stay preserved.

It's not merely about distance. It's about being on campus as opposed to being off campus. Even if your estimation of distance is correct, and it is not. There is a big difference between locating a brand new $80,000,000 state-of-the-art-university facility in a conspicuously off-campus downtown location and one that is clearly on campus right next to the on-campus stadium dorms and fraternity houses. Locating a new multipurpose arena a stone's throw away from and to the east of the stadium will not only actually be on campus, it will look and feel on campus. It's one thing for the university to purchase obsolete department stores and hotels to repurpose them in or near downtown and quite another for UA to build brand new, multi-million dollar facilities meant for the campus in an obvious off-campus location. Again, UA needs to be true to itself in order to benefit its main mission of serving its students and the region. As long as UA keeps its focus on that, downtown will always be the richer. The town-and-gown experience is alive and well at UA and is based on the institution's academic, intellectual and research relationship with the entire community as well as serving as a major economic engine for the region, state and nation. Too many Akronites have gotten away from what town-and-gown truly means and have turned the concept into some type of fiscal/one dimensional free-for-all.

The University admitedly built a 30,000 seat stadium in the heart of the campus in order to attract future students and they would do the same with a 10,000 seat arena. They don't consider the stadium a "horrible" recrutment tool so why would they see a multi-purpose arena any other way? The fact is they don't. Your assessment is based on misguided thinking or just a naked desire to be churlish and oppositional. As far as UA having an obligation to the greater public. I never said otherwise. Please be aware that the greater public includes the region and state and not just parochial downtown Akron. We're bigger than that now. And the fact remains that some things are simply not UA's job. And engaging in ephemeral, joint capital improvement ventures with downtown politicians is certainly in the category of not being UA's job. It is not parochial to expect an organization to be true to its mission and live up to authentic ways to give back to the community. The fact that I may or may not have millions is irrelevant and one among a number of disingenuous if not haughty statements made by you as a way to discount legitimate expectations by everyday citizens of this city state and region. And just like all of us, UA pays the city for use of its utilities. The city has no right to demand UA does anymore than that. Or, perhaps I should include a Christmas Card with an extra check in it to the water department this December.

UA student - here are some words/terms for you on which to contemplate: "big picture", "potential capacity for the stadium to build its fan base", "small campus" "Roo Express", "planning ahead", "intentions of UA officials", "future mission related goals", "boundaries and not walls" I talk with people in Buchtel Hall and more and they never said they don't want large crowds of non-UA people in the heart of the campus. The truth is that they do want large numbers of UA students and non-UA students in the heart of the UA campus. Quit making stuff up. Your logic is beyond flawed. You ask why shouldn't UA help out downtown? The answer is that's not UA's job. Yet, it is already helping downtown. You keep ignoring the fact that UA can refrain from compromising itself and at the same time continue to help downtown even more in collateral and residual ways. UA has a very small campus and people will have no problem negotiating a true on-campus arena. The fact is, an on-campus arena would be very close to the student union. You need to take a tour of some more authentic looking campuses like OSU, OU, UC KSU. Students there walk alot further to negotiate their entire campus than UA students do. Your position seems to be that now that we have an on-campus stadium, we should be satisfied with that. We are not worthy to have anymore. That the stadium doesn't succeed at being filled is missing the point. My point is that if UA officials expects or want people to fill a 30,000 seat stadium in the heart of campus, it doesn't makes sense to say that they wouldn't want an arena that has the potential of drawing less than 1/3 of that capacity to the heart of campus through an on-campus arena. The point is, the fact that a 30,000 seat stadium is in the heart of the campus (and not whether it is filled or not) debunks your cooked up desire by UA officials to not want large crowds of non-UA people on campus through a much smaller facility (arena) than the stadium. The only way I would accept an off-campus downtown arena would be if the city of Akron takes total responsibility for the costs of building, operating and owning the structure while allowing UA to be its "favored tenant".

Imagine 10,000 people dispersing out of a major concert directly on the UA campus and seeing how inviting our campus is and then imagine the possibility of a fraction of that 10,000 deciding to enroll at UA. Then imagine those 10,000 people leaving the campus in order to enjoy drinks and food 1/4 quarter of a mile to the west in downtown just as a potential 30,000 people will do when visiting the already on-campus stadium. There is no way that a UA administrator stated that the university doesn't want 10,000 non-UA people on its campus when UA has already invited as much as 30,000 people to its campus by building an on-campus stadium. As always, someone is making up stories by pretending that they have been talking to "sources" at UA. Stating that UA doesn't want non-UA people on UA's campus is not only a lie. It doesn't even make sense. Please share with us the so called reason why UA doesn't want too many "non-UA people" on its campus. I can't wait to hear the answer to this made up campus legend. As long as I can remember, we could always rely on Akron yokles making up fake positions about UA policy and philosophy. They get these positions from where the sun don't shine.

If you would be so kind as to page up on this thread you will see what in the world I am talking about. Try being a little more observant. Here is the post that is indeed on this thread: Akron U. growing at city's expense? Sunday, August 12, 2007 Laura Johnston Plain Dealer Reporter Akron- The towering silos of Crowne Plaza Quaker Square once stored tons of oats. Today, guests sleep within those concrete walls in what's dubbed the "Most Unique Hotel in the World." But in months, no more. The 196 round rooms carved from those Quaker Oats grain silos will become the University of Akron's newest residence hall. Linked to plans for a new $55 million stadium, the swank dorm is the latest in the school's New Landscape for Learning, which has already transformed the once-commuter college into an enviable campus. Some laud the growth. Others wonder whether the school teeters on taking over the Rubber City.

First off the Plain Dealer reporter doesn't even know the correct name of our school. Second, the headline is pretty dishonest. UA is growing at the city's benefit and not expense. Quaker Square closed down because its owner Jay Nausbaum got rid of it. UA refused to take his offer to buy it from him twice, but the third time seemed the charm. I don't recall seeing or hearing any other entity fighting with UA over buying Quaker Square from Mr. Nausbaum. The truth is that no one wanted the facility so UA as usual saves it from the wrecking ball at the university's expense. The headline should have read: "Downtown Akron once again shutters itself at The University of Akron's expense".

"See the campus as they pass it from the highway"? You are kidding right? :drunk: What's great for UA is great for downtown (the converse is not necessarily true) and all of the Akron/Summit County community and NE Ohio region. That is the point of my post. UA is just starting to have a campus with integrity and credibility. That alone ads integrity and credibility to the entire city and surrounding community. UA is no longer a community college with a sign on it stating, "For Akronites Only" We need to stay macro and think regional. UA is not just about downtown anymore. UA is already bringing out-of-towners into downtown, building up its night life, etc by being true to itself. I hear what you are saying but the goals of which you speak are already being accomplished by UA making itself look like an actual college campus. As I said, city and county officials already have acknowleged that the on-campus stadium is building up downtown. So, by their logic and mine an on-campus arena will do so as well and intensify what you want to see happen. The city and its citizens are in no fiscal position to join in a collaberative venture for an arena. However, UA can and will be in a position to collaberate with many individuals and private companies in order to pay for a new on-campus arena. UA does it all the time as do all public universities. An integrated campus with clear boundaries lends credence to itself as well as the community surrounding it. Our campus needs to look even more like a campus and less like an extension of downtown. We're worth it and we desrve it.

Leigh Hall is going nowhere. UA just renovated it and it is regarded as practically a brand new building. Crouse and Ayer are another story. I expect Ayer to be the next to go. And the truth is that UA administrators want an on-campus arena because they want non-UA students to come to the vortex of the university. This is precisely why UA built an on-campus stadium. This is what is called marketing your product. The last thing UA wants to do is splatter its resources such as a premium facility as an arena all over downtown and discourage the general non-UA public from coming to the heart of its beautiful, park-like setting of a campus. The UA campus is "the place to be" as Dr Proenza so many times says. It is the perfect location for a multi-purpose arena where people can come to see not only sports but major concert attractions and performers. This is one reason why we have an obviouos on-campus stadium. UA officials know full well that non-UA students come to the stadium even more so than UA students. Non-UA students are potential UA students. UA will not put an arena downtown because it doesn't want to throw away a major marketing strategy. Yes, currently the 30,000 seat stadium is not drawing the numbers that UA would like, but the fact that they want 30,000 people coming to campus proves that they want to encourage large numbers of non-students and their parents to come to the heart of the campus through a 10-12k arena...that and the fact that development and institutional marketing folks have told me so. There is plenty of room for a 10 - 12K on-campus arena and a Greek Village (if the Greeks want one) just east of InfoCision Stadium/Summa Field where the SkyWay was supposed to be. The stadium location is great for downtown (even the ABJ dubbed it as a "downtown football stadium"). And county a city officials consider InfoCision a great asset to downtown. An arena just east of the stadium would be truly on-campus and a plus for downtown just like the stadium. It's a win/win. Also, plans for putting an arena across from Canal Park have been scrapped. Also, E.J. Thomas Hall is going nowhere. The quote in the paper was a childish and manipulative remark made by a game player known as Dan Dahl, a UA administrator and director of this campus sub-venue. Now, there is some truth to the rumor that Mr. Dahl is not long for our campus and I say good riddance.