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.

^^^ Watched the splashy video for the University Park Alliance.  Some interesting fun helicopter footage at the beginning.  Towards the end I slowed it down and paused their ideas of where they see there needs to be new development.  I don't see a lot of it as very likely.  They might get pieces of some but I don't see a "legacy village" development taking over the zip strip.  With all the variety of venues available in Akron, I think it will be a hard sell to put a venue in the place of lock 3 park, the caveat being if EJ Thomas Performing Arts is going to be scuttled.  Some of the buildings around the hospitals look doable.  Some lofts along the canal I suppose is doable.  But I don't see the canal being THAT big of a draw that people want "canal-front" property..  That seems a little over the top. 

  I kept my eyes peeled for any transportation suggestions.  It looks like they didn't really focus on that at least from the video.  I'm curious to see what they may have put into the report.  I'm guessing since they released that on Wednesday, maybe it will be in the Sunday BJ?  It just seemed more like at least in the video's case that where they saw an open space they visualized a big building that might be able to fit in that space.

 

Thomas Hall is not going to be scuttled. Dan Dahl suggest such an absurd thing in the press a while ago because he likes melo drama and was just goading his bosses at UA which will eventually get him fired.

The announced that ZAR would be going into 22 Ex. in the same press release as 401 Lofts. Its the same owner as LUX. I would assume that LUX would close. It also says that it is going to be a 2-story club. I don't see how that's possible though. It looks like there are occupied apartments on the 2nd floor on the corner and it wasn't built with a basement. Maybe somebody knows something I don't know.

 

Maybe if UA would start giving students what they want, they wouldn't go home for the weekend. UA's Thomas Hall still serves the non-UA student population far more than UA students in spite of the fact that they did an article a few years back claiming that UA would serve the students more with its PAH. Student funds run that place and all UA students get are Halloween paries and Fat Tuesdays Parties with a dJ and pizza or else dinky stage door shows that serve 1 - 2 % of the UA student population. What a rip off.

Well since the University thread is locked.. :-/ I guess Ill just have to post this on here...

 

UA Soccer Field Has New Name

6/15/2011 3:30:48 PM  |  University of Akron Athletics - news release

 

There's already a football stadium with corporate naming rights locked down; add Lee Jackson Field to the mix seeing a name change.

 

Continuing its more than 50-year philanthropic relationship with The University of Akron, FirstEnergy Corporation has made its latest commitment to the institution, which includes the naming of the University's men's and women's soccer stadium.

 

http://www.akronnewsnow.com/sports/itemdetail.asp?ID=45898&section=sports&subsection=uofasports&title=UA_Soccer_Field_Has_New_Name

 

UA buys Mill Street property

 

University to pay $1.4 million for bakery site

 

By Carol Biliczky

Beacon Journal staff writer

 

University of Akron trustees agreed Wednesday to buy long-sought land on the north side of campus.

 

UA will spend $1.4 million for the store and 1890s-era bakery on Mill Street owned by Hostess Brands of Houston.

 

''Since we surround the property on three sides, it's a natural for us to own it,'' said Ted Curtis, vice president of capital planning and facilities management. ''We are extremely happy to get it.''

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/123981674.html

The U of A hired Populous to perform the feasibility study on JAR Arena. I doubt an international firm is going to go after a little feasibility study without their being a hit of building a new arena in the near future. I think their findings will point to this. Populous was the firm for the new Yankee Stadium to put things in perspective.

 

Maybe, maybe not. They probably wouldn't be doing the feasability study if they already knew the answer.

 

Personally(and I have nothing to substantiate this), I wouldn't be surprised if someone built a new stadium in the next few years. Coach Dambrot probably would have something to do with this...

The U of A hired Populous to perform the feasibility study on JAR Arena. I doubt an international firm is going to go after a little feasibility study without their being a hit of building a new arena in the near future. I think their findings will point to this. Populous was the firm for the new Yankee Stadium to put things in perspective.

 

Maybe, maybe not. They probably wouldn't be doing the feasability study if they already knew the answer.

 

Personally(and I have nothing to substantiate this), I wouldn't be surprised if someone built a new stadium in the next few years. Coach Dambrot probably would have something to do with this...

 

That's not necessarily true. 1.) They probably have to show due dilligence and that they are not willfully wasting money b/c they want a new arena, 2.) they can skew the study any way they want to show the outcome they desire.

 

and on that note:

 

UA basketball teams get new lounges at Rhodes Arena

 

By Tom Gaffney

Beacon Journal sports writer

Published: October 26, 2011 - 12:30 AM

 

University of Akron basketball players have a new home away from home.

 

The men’s and women’s teams now have separate lounges and a common weight room at Rhodes Arena. The project was started in March and completed late in the summer.

 

http://www.ohio.com/sports/ua-basketball-teams-get-new-lounges-at-rhodes-arena-1.242089

That's not necessarily true. 1.) They probably have to show due dilligence and that they are not willfully wasting money b/c they want a new arena, 2.) they can skew the study any way they want to show the outcome they desire.

 

Interesting.

UA would get Central-Hower under state bill

 

By Carol Biliczky

Beacon Journal staff report

 

Two local education officials testified Wednesday afternoon in Columbus in favor of a bill that would transfer Central-Hower High School to the University of Akron and award scholarships to some Akron Public Schools students.

 

UA President Luis Proenza and schools Superintendent David James told the House Education Committee that House Bill 381 would be a win-win deal for the school district and university.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/local/ua-would-get-central-hower-under-state-bill-1.264005

I think the addition of Central-Hower should really help tie the north end of the campus together.  With the possible addition of the hostess factory, UA is getting close to having a unified campus between exchange and market.

I think the addition of Central-Hower should really help tie the north end of the campus together.  With the possible addition of the hostess factory, UA is getting close to having a unified campus between exchange and market.

They bought the Hostess factory last summer. Probably still deciding what to do with the land or waiting to acquire the car radiator repair shop on the corner of Mill & College.

University of Akron studies future of Rhodes Arena

 

By Carol Biliczky

Beacon Journal staff writer

 

...

Nor has Akron Mayor Don Plusquellic, who said Monday he is disappointed that UA officials are studying the future arena without input from other government agencies or the business community.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/university-of-akron-studies-future-of-rhodes-arena-1.264926

This hush-hush preliminary feasibility study must clearly show that the best place for an arena is Downt ......

 

[begins dodging flying flames and banhammers ...]

Lol nice!  I was curious to see how this article with not really a whole lot new would play on here.  There are a lot of long winded comments on ohio.com that probably don't need to be rehashed here.  I say let all parties discuss and come to a conclusion based on financial incentives and what is best for University. 

Sasaki paints broad picture of UA campus

 

By Carol Biliczky

Beacon Journal staff writer

 

The consultants would level Schrank Hall South, which is in need of extensive maintenance, to make way for more green space.

 

Eight buildings would be remodeled and sometimes repurposed for new uses. For instance, the Knight Chemical Laboratory would become classroom space, and Zook Hall would be renovated for its existing tenants, the College of Education.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/local-news/sasaki-paints-broad-picture-of-ua-campus-1.269034

 

Looks like they probably aren't going to build a new College of Education as originally planned.

Sasaki paints broad picture of UA campus

 

By Carol Biliczky

Beacon Journal staff writer

 

The consultants would level Schrank Hall South, which is in need of extensive maintenance, to make way for more green space.

 

Eight buildings would be remodeled and sometimes repurposed for new uses. For instance, the Knight Chemical Laboratory would become classroom space, and Zook Hall would be renovated for its existing tenants, the College of Education.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/local-news/sasaki-paints-broad-picture-of-ua-campus-1.269034

 

Looks like they probably aren't going to build a new College of Education as originally planned.

 

The new Ed building was supposed to complete the overall design of the student center. It would look a bit incomplete if they didn't build where Memorial Hall was.

Sasaki paints broad picture of UA campus

 

By Carol Biliczky

Beacon Journal staff writer

 

The consultants would level Schrank Hall South, which is in need of extensive maintenance, to make way for more green space.

 

Eight buildings would be remodeled and sometimes repurposed for new uses. For instance, the Knight Chemical Laboratory would become classroom space, and Zook Hall would be renovated for its existing tenants, the College of Education.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/local-news/sasaki-paints-broad-picture-of-ua-campus-1.269034

 

Looks like they probably aren't going to build a new College of Education as originally planned.

 

The new Ed building was supposed to complete the overall design of the student center. It would look a bit incomplete if they didn't build where Memorial Hall was.

 

What is that's where they were looking to put a new arena?

As the article says, they suggested: "and Zook Hall would be renovated for its existing tenants, the College of Education."

I'd actually prefer for the arena to go in a spot where there can be spinoff; in an existing or future commercial district. I think the Arena District in Columbus would be a great thing to emulate.

 

I tried to look for pics of the originally proposed College of Education building that was supposed to go there but couldn't find them. I remember the concept looking pretty cool too!

I'd actually prefer for the arena to go in a spot where there can be spinoff; in an existing or future commercial district. I think the Arena District in Columbus would be a great thing to emulate.

 

I tried to look for pics of the originally proposed College of Education building that was supposed to go there but couldn't find them. I remember the concept looking pretty cool too!

I couldn't agree more, but there is some strong contention on both sides on that topic.

 

Are you sure about renderings for the College of Education? I don't recall them ever releasing anything. Last I heard they were still working on the programming of the building (size of departments and even who would be in the building), then it got put on hold.

I'd actually prefer for the arena to go in a spot where there can be spinoff; in an existing or future commercial district. I think the Arena District in Columbus would be a great thing to emulate.

 

I tried to look for pics of the originally proposed College of Education building that was supposed to go there but couldn't find them. I remember the concept looking pretty cool too!

I couldn't agree more, but there is some strong contention on both sides on that topic.

 

Are you sure about renderings for the College of Education? I don't recall them ever releasing anything. Last I heard they were still working on the programming of the building (size of departments and even who would be in the building), then it got put on hold.

 

Yes I'm sure. But they were super-preliminary, dating from at least two years ago. Probably even older....I've searched "landscape for learning" but sadly, I can't find hardly any renderings for campus.

This is the only plan that I have seen of the future building for the College of Education. I have never seen actual building renderings though.

 

 

Any renderings of the new UofA law building over the tracks?

 

Are you sure about renderings for the College of Education? I don't recall them ever releasing anything. Last I heard they were still working on the programming of the building (size of departments and even who would be in the building), then it got put on hold.

 

Best I could find...College of Ed was to be "future building" on the right side. Sorry I can't find the rendering of the actual building.

 

http://www.uakron.edu/dotAsset/155048.jpg

 

p.s. fittingly enough, this pic is already on urbanohio!!

Any renderings of the new UofA law building over the tracks?

 

I don't know why it's so hard to find U of A renderings lol. Getting a lot of this:

 

"Sorry, the page you requested could not be found. Please make sure you entered the URL properly."

 

I did find this, which I'm betting you've seen:

 

http://akronrrclub.wordpress.com/2009/12/24/university-plans-to-raze-akron-union-depot/

Any renderings of the new UofA law building over the tracks?

 

No, and it's on hold indefinitely now. State pulled their funding, so they have to figure out where to get some $$$, looking at donors.

here's a link to the feasibility study they did in which they determined to build a new building instead of remodeling the existing:

http://www3.uakron.edu/bids/lawschoolcmdrawingss.ppt

Any renderings of the new UofA law building over the tracks?

 

No, and it's on hold indefinitely now. State pulled their funding, so they have to figure out where to get some $$$, looking at donors.

here's a link to the feasibility study they did in which they determined to build a new building instead of remodeling the existing:

http://www3.uakron.edu/bids/lawschoolcmdrawingss.ppt

 

Thanks!

Was just listening to an interview on 92.3 The Fan with Akron head coach Terry Bowden. He mentioned that on Jim Tressel's main agenda is helping to increase enrollment. UA has a serious goal of adding 10,000 more students. The question is, if this does occur will those students be commuting or will they living on/near campus? If it's the latter, the sheer volume of students could be a game-changer for reviving downtown. The pedestrian-centric Akron of the future could be here sooner than you think.

Nice. An additional 10k students will put UA in the top tier of state universities in Ohio for enrollment. It also means the city will soon be dusting off some of its other older and nearly forgotten districts like Middlebury and South Main near Firestone's old HQ.

Nice. An additional 10k students will put UA in the top tier of state universities in Ohio for enrollment. It also means the city will soon be dusting off some of its other older and nearly forgotten districts like Middlebury and South Main near Firestone's old HQ.

 

Diamonds in the rough!

Nice. An additional 10k students will put UA in the top tier of state universities in Ohio for enrollment. It also means the city will soon be dusting off some of its other older and nearly forgotten districts like Middlebury and South Main near Firestone's old HQ.

 

Diamonds in the rough!

 

Very rough, sadly.

 

As for adding 10,000 more students: I would have to imagine that they are planning to add most of them as residents and not commuters, because I'm not sure where they'd even *find* 10,000 more high school students within commuting distance.  That's a pretty ambitious goal, after all.

 

The amount of new student residential construction also speaks strongly of an intent to bring more students onto campus (or immediately off campus).

 

Students are an interesting demographic.  They are young, generally unskilled, and transient.  They often spend above their means as a matter of course, fueled by both student loans and (for the lucky ones) financial lifelines to their parents.  And, of course, they bring a lot of energy to an area (good and bad, on occasion).

 

Downtown Akron and University Park combined are large enough that I'm confident that this would be a positive development.  It's true that many more experienced professionals would not want to live in the middle of a mass of college students, but that is unlikely to be necessary.

 

All that said, I worry about an overreliance on students as drivers of new energy downtown.  I would much rather do a better job of keeping the university's top graduates in the Akron area after graduation, rather than losing them via brain drain to other cities.  Even a small difference in retention each year would add up to a lot over time.

I suspect we'll see a lot of new proposals for housing and parking decks. But I sure wish the latter was spent for putting some commuter trains on Akron Metro's rights of way that go through the heart of the campus/downtown Akron and out to Hudson, Kent and Canton. For some reason, the folks at Akron Metro RTA believe that UofA's honchos don't want the trains or even improved bus transit. Are they right?

For some reason, the folks at Akron Metro RTA believe that UofA's honchos don't want the trains or even improved bus transit. Are they right?

 

I don't currently have any "in" with UA. But after 23 years I'd say I'm pretty familiar with the way they do things. It would be extremely unfortunate, but I wouldn't be that surprised if the board were anti-transit. It's because outside of student circulators, the idea of transit is urban, and while not exactly a foreign concept, the idea of going "urban" is a much maligned concept for some at the school.

 

Look, UA has a very mixed, contrasting record for urban planning. Almost schizophrenic at times, with on the one hand their desire to "bridge the tracks" into downtown. This was the legacy of President Muse, for UA to revitalize downtown.

 

Yet on the other hand, the school cannot seem to maximize the benefits of the same urban environment. Some students and faculty absolutely hate the idea of campus extending into "the city." The weird, fortress-like treatment of the Polsky Building is stark evidence of this. But it's not just Polsky, the overall campus identity continues even today as a strange, hodge podge mix of conflicting urban and suburban planning.

 

And I don't want to say UA is alone here. Anyone who has been to OSU could say the same about that campus I suppose.

 

But in short, I have the idea that UA is a school that's not really comfortable in its location. Which is too bad. It's offensive to my principles, and I've suggested this already, but U Akron could have really benefited from the help of (the hated!) KSU and their School of Urban Design.

 

Last, when I was a student, even as recently as late 90's, there was a very negative perception of Main St. downtown. Why? Because the sidewalks were often very crowded with poor "bus people." The perception of crime. Public Square Syndrome. Logically, it's an image that you can easily imagine some at UA want to distance themselves from. Perhaps the "negative" perception of public transit right in the middle of campus, and more "bus/train people" is a threatening one to some in power.

 

Again this is me speculating...I'm very passionate about Akron, even though it may seems I love to hate the place. Quite the opposite. I bleed Zips blue and gold. The issue is important enough to me that it's worth a few phone calls to get an inside idea of why UA would not embrace the rail RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE of campus.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I went to school during the Muse era as well. I remember there was a front page article in the Buchtelite pondering a train connecting the campuses of UA and KSU. It was mainly reporting based on conversations the 2 University presidents had about the subject and whether that was a good thing or a bad thing. On one side it looked fairly doable. The track is there and not really being used.  But the dark underlying factor as seen possibly from Columbus is it could see it then as a single merged state school with that linkage.  I feel it was dropped from consideration at that point since neither president felt a merger was in their interest, shotgun or otherwise.

^I remember back when President Reubel said UA would eventually pull out of Polsky's in the late 90s. How much times have changed. Whatever UA's reservations have been about moving downtown, with the emergence of student housing in the Quaker Square and Canal Park districts, it seems to be happening anyway out of sheer need for student housing if nothing else. I can't imagine that this isn't having an impact on student opinion. As more students live, work, and socialize downtown, I have to believe UA's culture will shift to accomodate Downtown Akron more fully into its influence and campus reach, even if it takes the current generation of campus admins moving on to get to that point.

 

As far as UA not being comfortable in its present spot, that was always easy to see and get a sense of as a student. Kent was the direct opposite, a school that was very certain about itself and knew what and where it wanted to be. I remember hearing about how there were plans long ago to relocate UA when it was still Buchtel College out to the Fairlawn Heights area of West Akron onto what is currently the Fairlawn Country Club golf course. I try to imagine now what a different future that would have meant for the city and for downtown in particular. Would Buchtel College even have evolved into its present form, or might it have gone a different route, becoming something more akin to Hiram, or perhaps Case Western Reserve? Downtown Akron would certainly be less fortunate for not having UA's presence now, and it would likely be in a similar predicament as Downtown Toledo, the CBD of another mid-sized city whose own university is located on the outskirts of town and has no other major drivers of revitalization and growth present downtown.

 

I still say rail will come. That time may not begin in earnest for a few more years, but we will see it in our lifetimes, and early enough to enjoy it.

I went to school during the Muse era as well. I remember there was a front page article in the Buchtelite pondering a train connecting the campuses of UA and KSU. It was mainly reporting based on conversations the 2 University presidents had about the subject and whether that was a good thing or a bad thing. On one side it looked fairly doable. The track is there and not really being used.  But the dark underlying factor as seen possibly from Columbus is it could see it then as a single merged state school with that linkage.  I feel it was dropped from consideration at that point since neither president felt a merger was in their interest, shotgun or otherwise.

I don't think UA would necessarily care nowadays. They seemed in favor of a regional "University of Northeast Ohio" merger between UA, Cleveland State, Youngstown State, and Kent when it was first discussed a few years ago. UA would likely have become the flagship campus with Proenza presiding over the entire university structure. CSU and YSU seemed warm to the idea, but Kent balked at it. Kent has never been too keen about any threat to their identity.

I do not know about UA or Proenza, but I know that Mayor Plusquellic is not keen on the concept of rail-based transit, preferring instead to expand bus service.  He actually cited the fixed routes of rail-based transit as a strike against that mode of transportation, preferring buses instead because the routes can be changed; I did not have an opportunity to follow up my question (this was in a mid-sized YP group Q&A session with the mayor) with a question regarding whether he was aware of any of the fairly substantial body of research at the moment indicating that developers prefer the fixed routes of rail because they are less susceptible to political and bureaucratic caprice.

Academic 'main street' proposed for campus

 

06/13/2012

 

At today's Board of Trustees meeting, Board members accepted an enhanced master guide plan that includes an academic "main street" for campus and heard about ideas intended to further strengthen Summit College.

 

http://www.uakron.edu/im/online-newsroom/news_details.dot?newsId=bd284e39-3033-4604-a079-140259257cf4&pageTitle=Top%20Story%20Headline&crumbTitle=Academic%20'main%20street'%20proposed%20for%20campus

 

 

(Wow ... did this thread really sit idle for a full year?!)

 

I note that, at least per that summary, the Board was considering two different locations for a replacement for the arena and didn't appear to be leaning strongly in either direction as yet:

 

Two potential scenarios were identified for replacing the James A. Rhodes Arena. The first is to build the new arena in a consolidated athletics district near InfoCision Stadium. The second option is to partner with the city to attract appropriate funding to develop a new arena downtown, opposite the Akron Aeros baseball stadium on South Main Street.

 

As for the discussion of Summit College, I found that somewhat confusing:

 

The following ideas were discussed:

 

    1. modify the name of the college to something like "UA – Summit College of Technology and Applied (or Professional) Studies."

    2. examine the benefits of upgrading the college's status to that of a branch campus.

 

The proposed name change would strengthen the college's identity to critical audiences, especially prospective students and local employers.  A new name would better recognize the attributes of its programs, and it would differentiate the college through a better alignment with technical workforce needs. Further, a new name would emphasize the college's focus on work-sector degrees.

 

The proposed status change to a branch campus would carry those attributes, plus it would:

 

    1. align the University better with the University System of Ohio's reporting structure; and

    2. strengthen the University's ability to serve students who need remedial work, at a lower cost.

 

First, as to the name, my reaction was strongly negative based on syllable count.  If they want a more accurate and descriptive name, they could call it University of Akron Technical College, Akron Technical College, or Summit Technical College.  (I grew up near Newark, and Central Ohio Technical College, which shared a campus with OSU-Newark, was a perfectly fine school for vocational/technical programs.)  "Applied Studies" and/or "Professional Studies" add lots of syllables and little meaning.

 

Second, why would the upgrade to a branch campus make it easier to serve students at lower cost?  From the students' perspective, is tuition lower at branch campuses?  From the university's perspective, are wage costs or other major expenses structurally lower at branch campuses?  After all, Summit College is physically right here in Akron with the rest of main campus.

/\/\/\  The thread was locked because people were arguing.

 

This should bring the arguing back, or finish it:

 

UA unveils new guide plan

 

By Carol Biliczky

Beacon Journal staff writer

Published: June 13, 2012 - 10:59 PM | Updated: June 14, 2012 - 08:19 AM

 

University of Akron trustees gave a thumbs up on Wednesday to what could become a new round of campus expansion.

 

The new master guide plan could fuel $400 million in construction, but details of what is to be done when — if at all — have yet to be hammered out.

 

One of the suggestions in the Sasaki Associates plan for the University of Akron would be to build a new basketball arena to replace Rhodes Arena either on the corner of Spicer and Exchange streets or in downtown Akron across from Canal Park.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/local/ua-unveils-new-guide-plan-1.313934

 

Sasaki pinpoints two options. One site is on UA land at the corner of Spicer and Exchange streets, next to InfoCision Stadium. Or UA could partner with the city of Akron to attract funding to build a new arena across from Canal Park where the Akron Aeros play minor-league baseball.

 

Sasaki does not indicate which of the two sites it prefers, and Curtis has a third idea of his own

 

He suggests attaching a new arena with 7,000 seats to the Rhodes Arena and converting the existing space into two practice gyms.

 

“Having a totally new facility is even more exciting, and whether it’s on Spicer Street or downtown, a new arena is a new arena,” Curtis said. “I could go for any of the three solutions.”

 

 

Interesting as well:

 

"Existing programs in the Polsky Building, such as language pathology and audiology, could remain downtown—so that the health professions become identity anchors to both the eastern and western gateways of the Academic Way."

 

Yes, I believe tuition is lower at branch campuses. That is why some people choose them and I have also heard that the teaching / learning can be better.

^ Gramarye I cannot agree with you more on that bizarre name change. It's confounding. Do they really hate Polksy that much!!

 

As for remaking/renaming Buchtel Commons, I'm looking forward to seeing more. In the first pic all I can see is they're switching around some patches of grass. It's got to be more far reaching, according to the article.

[edit] upon further inspection, there looks to be some much need aesthetic changes to the Library other buildings. I'm sold.

 

The Arena comment was interesting, as it suggests there are only two options in consideration. I'm not sold on the logic of locating an Arena by the Info Stadium. I mean, aside from consolidating parking (and there are parking opportunities all over), what's the advantage?

 

The Arena District in Columbus should be the gold standard. Design the Akron Arena in close, synergistic proximity to spinoff development. Not next to what will be a huge empty football stadium.

surf: yanni's article suggested that a third site was also under consideration, but didn't say what it was.

 

I think Spicer and downtown still have to be the two leading contenders, though, based on geography and existing infrastructure.

 

As for the Arena District: There are two reasons to be concerned there.  First, the Arena District is still quite vibrant, but Nationwide Arena itself has been struggling, largely due to the travails of the Blue Jackets.  Second, looking at the entire Arena District, Nationwide Realty Investors spend massively more on that district than UA will have in its budget for a new basketball arena and associated spinoff development.  Now, of course, hopefully UPA will attract a lot of spinoff development that will not be directly tied to the university, but Akron will not have the kind of control over that that NRI had over the development around Nationwide Arena (and, later, Huntington Park).

For those reasons as listed above i think that arena district is a bad analogy. I think gateway is closer but i think you'll find in any city ballfields in close proximity to arenas. Its just the benefits of having supporting entertainment district surround them both to maximize the investments. I have heard that the Mayflower may be a stumbling block and perhaps some other buildings close to where the arena may go. Not sure city is yet on same page as University on this.  I suppose there will be a study to decide on the 3 locations. The 3rd location is next to the JAR. I think county goverment will be participating for the financing which is why a downtown location would also make sense.

  So basically, if everyone plays nice there could be a nice fancy arena downtown. Perhaps a future minor league hockey team even.

surf: yanni's article suggested that a third site was also under consideration, but didn't say what it was.

 

I think Spicer and downtown still have to be the two leading contenders, though, based on geography and existing infrastructure.

 

As for the Arena District: There are two reasons to be concerned there.  First, the Arena District is still quite vibrant, but Nationwide Arena itself has been struggling, largely due to the travails of the Blue Jackets.  Second, looking at the entire Arena District, Nationwide Realty Investors spend massively more on that district than UA will have in its budget for a new basketball arena and associated spinoff development.  Now, of course, hopefully UPA will attract a lot of spinoff development that will not be directly tied to the university, but Akron will not have the kind of control over that that NRI had over the development around Nationwide Arena (and, later, Huntington Park).

 

I now think the third option is building next to JAR. [edit: i see audidave beat me to it!]

 

Those are good, valid points on the Arena Dist. Basically what I'd like to experience is an arena that has adjacent street life, lively with restaurants, bars, etc. You're right, Akron isn't in the same position as Columbus, but even a scaled down sports entertainment district would be great for Akron.

 

I see downtown as a better alternative for this kind of development. But I won't count out Spicer - there's some opportunity there too. But I see Rt. 8 as a growth-limitation for that locale.

 

The worst choice imho would be a complete, on campus location. The Schott in OSU for example, is an entertainment dead zone.

 

I understand the desire for some to want a venue that's completely within the confines of campus; they want visitors to see how nice the school is. For me personally, I'm not interested in walking past all kinds of nice-but-closed campus buildings before or after a game. I'd rather splurge on happy hours and wing specials.

Gramarye: The third site was what Ted Curtis envisioned as a 7000 seat arena attached to the JAR and using the JAR as practice courts.

 

I think it would be great for the Arena to go downtown. Aside from basketball games this could be used for so many other purposes other than sports. We could finally have a large enough space to hold larger concerts downtown.

 

If UA really wants to help improve the look of downtown these plans should include something for the Polsky Parking deck. This is the largest/ugliest looking structure downtown and could be better utilized and renovated. I always imagined a more modern facade on the outside with a lighting theme that would better the aesthetics of the area. If they were to build an arena downtown across from Canal Park this would best serve parking, but I think it would be great to see storefront go in on S. High Street across from the arena.

From the tone of the article, it sounds like Ted Curtis would be perfectly happy with the third option he proposed of renovating/adding space to the JAR. Purely from a utility and clustering standpoint for UA, it may well be the best option. However, given that the university is trying to stretch the boundaries of its campus and act as a force for community and economic development in Central Akron, I think UA would be missing a huge opportunity by passing on the other proposals that would better connect it to the surrounding community.

 

Personally, I like most the proposal to build a new arena adjacent to InfoCision Stadium on East Exchange and Spicer as I think it would not only keep a key facility within UA's athletics cluster, but it would also support the ongoing re-development of East Exchange and a key section of UA Park. surfohio, as you noted, Rt. 8 does seem to act as a barrier to growth beyond the Spicertown District into Middlebury though, but I think that could be addressed if the properties immediately east of the overpass were redeveloped into hotels, shops and restaurants. These would then draw people through the tunnel to the other half of East Exchange before and after games and possibly lead to further redevelopment into Middlebury.

 

Downtown would have its own advantages, as you noted uastudent12. And as anyone who has lived in Akron for more than a year or two knows, Mayor Plusquellic has been pushing UA to build a new arena downtown for years now. It isn't as convenient for UA from the standpoint of maintaining an athletics cluster, which is why they might be reluctant to move forward with this option. But if the City of Akron and Summit County are able to allocate supporting funds, this is most likely the deal that gets done. As a side note, they could still incorporate some small shops and retail into the arena streetwall along Main just like they did with Canal Park and Nationwide Arena in Columbus.

Regarding the proposed name change for Polsky's, I think UA should just go with something like Summit Technical College or Akron Technical College. It's easy to see shorthand casual references like ATC or "Akron Tech" catching on and spreading quickly. Keep it simple and to the point.

From the tone of the article, it sounds like Ted Curtis would be perfectly happy with the third option he proposed of renovating/adding space to the JAR. Purely from a utility and clustering standpoint for UA, it may well be the best option. However, given that the university is trying to stretch the boundaries of its campus and act as a force for community and economic development in Central Akron, I think UA would be missing a huge opportunity by passing on the other proposals that would better connect it to the surrounding community.

 

Agreed, but don't oversell this: UA and UPA still have many development opportunities in front of them even if they don't choose either of the first options.  An arena may be a very visible, headline-grabbing project, but there are many other prospective, productive uses for those parcels.  UPA has been doing an impressive job raising and attracting capital and getting good projects moving.

 

Personally, I like most the proposal to build a new arena adjacent to InfoCision Stadium on East Exchange and Spicer as I think it would not only keep a key facility within UA's athletics cluster, but it would also support the ongoing re-development of East Exchange and a key section of UA Park. surfohio, as you noted, Rt. 8 does seem to act as a barrier to growth beyond the Spicertown District into Middlebury though, but I think that could be addressed if the properties immediately east of the overpass were redeveloped into hotels, shops and restaurants. These would then draw people through the tunnel to the other half of East Exchange before and after games and possibly lead to further redevelopment into Middlebury.

 

That's easier said than done.  The reason for that is that the truly massive buildings east of 8 on Exchange are not just warehouses.  It's the main operational facility of <a href="http://www.recyclingcoordinators.com/Contact.aspx">Recycling Coordinators</a>, a major metal byproducts recycling business with a much more national reach than many people realize.  I don't see them moving anytime soon.  In fact, if anything, they're likely to grow; that area is more set up for their kind of work (i.e., medium-heavy industrial) than UA's.

That's easier said than done.  The reason for that is that the truly massive buildings east of 8 on Exchange are not just warehouses.  It's the main operational facility of <a href="http://www.recyclingcoordinators.com/Contact.aspx">Recycling Coordinators</a>, a major metal byproducts recycling business with a much more national reach than many people realize.  I don't see them moving anytime soon.  In fact, if anything, they're likely to grow; that area is more set up for their kind of work (i.e., medium-heavy industrial) than UA's.

A valid observation, Gramarye. But nonetheless, I suspect at some point further down the road, the City of Akron is going to seriously look at providing incentives for this businesse to relocate to a designated industrial zone elsewhere in order to support what by then will be a flourishing East Exchange Corridor in need of more prime space for mixed used residential and commercial development. Besides, by that point, the business itself may very well be looking for the additional space to expand their operations and even seek the aid of the city in finding it. There are other parcels of industrial land in and around UA Park that will also eventually be reclaimed for residential use, parks and green space as Akron's core neighborhoods are reborn.

 

From another angle, if Akron is going to rebuild itself and attract and retain more residents, the city is going to have to do some substantial re-zoning and beautification work. UA Park developers will likely be able to create several vibrant corridors, but the impact of their efforts will be greatly enhanced if they aren't beholden to upholding and working around the city's industrial legacy.

I think that the OH-8 barrier will prove to be a bit less permeable than that.  Though, of course, if "further down the road" means decades from now, then anything is possible.  In the short and medium term, though, I think the university is going to be redeveloping its core first, then expanding into downtown second, then expanding north along 8 (but staying west of it) third, where there is still a lot of land to be developed between the university's existing northern reaches and Perkins/MLK.  Eastward expansion on the far side of the highway will likely come much later, and only if there is still demand after the central, westward (downtown), and northward expansions, which there may not be (i.e., the demand may have been basically satisfied by then).

 

As for Recycling Coordinators perhaps needing room to expand somewhere, we should take a walk or bike ride down this corridor sometime.  (Or just Google Street View it.)  If you drive down it at the speed that people typically drive on Exchange (which bears almost no relation to the posted speed limit), it's easy to miss just how much space there is right there for possible expansion (or for new, complementary industrial businesses), pretty much in all four directions--there's even some space in between the existing facility and the highway.

 

I actually don't think this corridor is all that essential for the university, either, even though it's Exchange.  The exits off OH-8 go to Carroll and Buchtel, which run parallel to Exchange to the north.  The same applies to the onramps; Exchange has no direct access to OH-8.  The walk under the bridge is unwelcoming, for the primary reason that it does go under the bridge (Carroll and Buchtel, by contrast, go over the highway).  It's easy to focus too much on it because it's Exchange, and Exchange really is important from OH-8 west through the heart of campus to downtown (and, really, all the way through downtown to OH-59 as well).  The road east from OH-8 may have the same name, but it's really a very different thoroughfare.

Wanted to point out that i posted an article earlier in the week in random akron devs about a new recycling center by the fulton airport. It basicallly said going forward all Akron and a lot of regional recycleables will be dropped off there instead of fountain st. I assume this would have a fairly large affect on this company. Point is i don't think they will need more room to expand unless i totally misunderstand what it is they do. 

 

I really don't think there is any designs by UPA on that area south of Exchange on the other side of 8. If they are wanting to revitalize housing stock they have their hands full on the western side of 8 south of Exchange.  The primary focus is what is marked as part of the biomedical corridor and anything on fringes of University property.