So, in summary

 

10 The stadium won't be built in downtown

20 Yes it will

30 No it won't

40 Goto 10

AJ: I'm really not taking a position on where any new UA arena should be built.  I'm not taking a position on when.  Heck, I'm not even taking a position on *if* a new UA arena should be built.  I have no opinion on the matter as now because the kind of things I'd care about are things like infrastructure support, construction costs, use and marketing studies, the potential need for eminent domain (a power that I'm always leery about using), and other things that I haven't seen, if they've been considered and analyzed in any official form at all.  Those are the things that would inform my decision, and I lack that information.

 

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years.  I think a UA arena would fit in fine in Downtown.  Also, as I said above, thinking fourth-dimensionally, building a new UA arena in Downtown would visibly expand the borders of "campus proper" to include the arena.  That said, I also think that Downtown will continue to develop without a major new landmark and attraction like that, too.  Many of the most successful bars and restaurants in Downtown are less than ten years old.  Its big draws like the Aeros and the concerts at Lock 3 do attract students, but they are not wholly dependent on student support.  Even Barley House is not Manny's or Thursday's.

 

I don't sit around thinking "you know, what Downtown really needs is an arena," nor do I check with the mayor (or anyone else) before posting my opinions here.  Personally, what I think it really needs is more white collar residential housing (which, incidentally, is <a href="http://www.ci.akron.oh.us/news_releases/Display.asp?RecNum=328">already on the way</a> in part, but I'd like to see even more), a form-based zoning code, and (elitist as this might be) a solution to the Mayflower Manor problem.  And, of course, existing projects need support through their fruition, such as the planned renovation of the Civic's connected buildings.  Of course I'd be excited to see the university expand into Downtown, but Akron Children's and Akron General expanding excite me far more.  If I could choose between getting an arena Downtown and the exact same dollar figure in investment from Intuitive Surgical, Medtronic, Illumina, Cardinal Health, or some other private sector employer that would have the potential to be a real image win for Akron's biotech sector, I'd take the less-well-known private sector employer in a heartbeat.  I disagree with Tom on the whole "separation of town and gown" worldview, but I simply can't muster the passion for this one issue that he has.

 

So please add a line of code:

 

40 Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but it won't be the end of the world either way.

50 Goto 10

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years. 

 

I just really started reading this thread and, admittedly, I keep reading because of what Gramarye describes above.  It's one of those really bizzare things that lends itself to (IMO) high comedy while reading an internet forum.

 

I just started getting to know Akron the past month or so since I've been working here.  Oddly, despite growing up almost as close to Akron as I was to Cleveland, I had pretty much never been here and knew nothing about it.  So my first impression when I went into the city was "Oh, that's pretty cool.  Campus is adjacent to downtown."  Kind of boxed in by the valley and surrounding freeways, it seemed more compact and connected than say, Cleveland and Cleveland State.  That was about it...I still don't really have much of a feel for it.

 

Then I read this thread and the vitriol from Tom regarding the arena potentially being built off campus in downtown Akron was amusing to me.  Had I not been to Akron, I might have thought downtown Akron and Akron U's campus were pretty seperate.  Frankly, I'm not exactly sure where one starts and the other ends.  So I don't really understand what the argument is about, or at least I have no idea what there is to get so worked up about.  It's not like they're considering a site out by the Rubber Bowl.

AJ: I'm really not taking a position on where any new UA arena should be built.  I'm not taking a position on when.  Heck, I'm not even taking a position on *if* a new UA arena should be built.  I have no opinion on the matter as now because the kind of things I'd care about are things like infrastructure support, construction costs, use and marketing studies, the potential need for eminent domain (a power that I'm always leery about using), and other things that I haven't seen, if they've been considered and analyzed in any official form at all.  Those are the things that would inform my decision, and I lack that information.

 

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years.  I think a UA arena would fit in fine in Downtown.  Also, as I said above, thinking fourth-dimensionally, building a new UA arena in Downtown would visibly expand the borders of "campus proper" to include the arena.  That said, I also think that Downtown will continue to develop without a major new landmark and attraction like that, too.  Many of the most successful bars and restaurants in Downtown are less than ten years old.  Its big draws like the Aeros and the concerts at Lock 3 do attract students, but they are not wholly dependent on student support.  Even Barley House is not Manny's or Thursday's.

 

I don't sit around thinking "you know, what Downtown really needs is an arena," nor do I check with the mayor (or anyone else) before posting my opinions here.  Personally, what I think it really needs is more white collar residential housing (which, incidentally, is <a href="http://www.ci.akron.oh.us/news_releases/Display.asp?RecNum=328">already on the way</a> in part, but I'd like to see even more), a form-based zoning code, and (elitist as this might be) a solution to the Mayflower Manor problem.  And, of course, existing projects need support through their fruition, such as the planned renovation of the Civic's connected buildings.  Of course I'd be excited to see the university expand into Downtown, but Akron Children's and Akron General expanding excite me far more.  If I could choose between getting an arena Downtown and the exact same dollar figure in investment from Intuitive Surgical, Medtronic, Illumina, Cardinal Health, or some other private sector employer that would have the potential to be a real image win for Akron's biotech sector, I'd take the less-well-known private sector employer in a heartbeat.  I disagree with Tom on the whole "separation of town and gown" worldview, but I simply can't muster the passion for this one issue that he has.

 

So please add a line of code:

 

40 Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but it won't be the end of the world either way.

50 Goto 10

 

You have the classic distorted if not perverted view of the concept of Town-and -Gown. The concept is about a university's intellectual, academic and research relationship with its entire community and not contaminated capitol improvement projects with parochial downtown politicians over any structure. Your view is so typically "Akron" and I disagree with it.

AJ: I'm really not taking a position on where any new UA arena should be built.  I'm not taking a position on when.  Heck, I'm not even taking a position on *if* a new UA arena should be built.  I have no opinion on the matter as now because the kind of things I'd care about are things like infrastructure support, construction costs, use and marketing studies, the potential need for eminent domain (a power that I'm always leery about using), and other things that I haven't seen, if they've been considered and analyzed in any official form at all.  Those are the things that would inform my decision, and I lack that information.

 

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years.  I think a UA arena would fit in fine in Downtown.  Also, as I said above, thinking fourth-dimensionally, building a new UA arena in Downtown would visibly expand the borders of "campus proper" to include the arena.  That said, I also think that Downtown will continue to develop without a major new landmark and attraction like that, too.  Many of the most successful bars and restaurants in Downtown are less than ten years old.  Its big draws like the Aeros and the concerts at Lock 3 do attract students, but they are not wholly dependent on student support.  Even Barley House is not Manny's or Thursday's.

 

I don't sit around thinking "you know, what Downtown really needs is an arena," nor do I check with the mayor (or anyone else) before posting my opinions here.  Personally, what I think it really needs is more white collar residential housing (which, incidentally, is <a href="http://www.ci.akron.oh.us/news_releases/Display.asp?RecNum=328">already on the way</a> in part, but I'd like to see even more), a form-based zoning code, and (elitist as this might be) a solution to the Mayflower Manor problem.  And, of course, existing projects need support through their fruition, such as the planned renovation of the Civic's connected buildings.  Of course I'd be excited to see the university expand into Downtown, but Akron Children's and Akron General expanding excite me far more.  If I could choose between getting an arena Downtown and the exact same dollar figure in investment from Intuitive Surgical, Medtronic, Illumina, Cardinal Health, or some other private sector employer that would have the potential to be a real image win for Akron's biotech sector, I'd take the less-well-known private sector employer in a heartbeat.  I disagree with Tom on the whole "separation of town and gown" worldview, but I simply can't muster the passion for this one issue that he has.

 

So please add a line of code:

 

40 Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but it won't be the end of the world either way.

50 Goto 10

 

You have the classic distorted if not perverted view of the concept of Town-and -Gown. The concept is about a university's intellectual, academic and research relationship with its entire community and not contaminated capitol improvement projects with parochial downtown politicians over any structure. Your view is so typically "Akron" and I disagree with it.

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years. 

 

I just really started reading this thread and, admittedly, I keep reading because of what Gramarye describes above.  It's one of those really bizzare things that lends itself to (IMO) high comedy while reading an internet forum.

 

I just started getting to know Akron the past month or so since I've been working here.  Oddly, despite growing up almost as close to Akron as I was to Cleveland, I had pretty much never been here and knew nothing about it.  So my first impression when I went into the city was "Oh, that's pretty cool.  Campus is adjacent to downtown."  Kind of boxed in by the valley and surrounding freeways, it seemed more compact and connected than say, Cleveland and Cleveland State.  That was about it...I still don't really have much of a feel for it.

 

Then I read this thread and the vitriol from Tom regarding the arena potentially being built off campus in downtown Akron was amusing to me.  Had I not been to Akron, I might have thought downtown Akron and Akron U's campus were pretty seperate.  Frankly, I'm not exactly sure where one starts and the other ends.  So I don't really understand what the argument is about, or at least I have no idea what there is to get so worked up about.  It's not like they're considering a site out by the Rubber Bowl.

 

 

Had I not been to Akron, I might have thought downtown Akron and Akron U's campus were pretty seperate.  Frankly, I'm not exactly sure where one starts and the other ends.

 

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,15165.30.html#ixzz1WZHCGUjd

 

That is your problem right there. There is a distinction between The University of Akron (BTW - It is not called Akron U) and downtown Akron and the last thing our UA wants to do is look like a cheap version of Cleveland State. We are an urban campus and we are proud to look like a distinct campus. Anything less than that is a knock off university deserving of little respect and recognition and saying so is not vitriol against downtown Akron. Quit putting words in another's mouth.

AJ: I'm really not taking a position on where any new UA arena should be built.  I'm not taking a position on when.  Heck, I'm not even taking a position on *if* a new UA arena should be built.  I have no opinion on the matter as now because the kind of things I'd care about are things like infrastructure support, construction costs, use and marketing studies, the potential need for eminent domain (a power that I'm always leery about using), and other things that I haven't seen, if they've been considered and analyzed in any official form at all.  Those are the things that would inform my decision, and I lack that information.

 

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years.  I think a UA arena would fit in fine in Downtown.  Also, as I said above, thinking fourth-dimensionally, building a new UA arena in Downtown would visibly expand the borders of "campus proper" to include the arena.  That said, I also think that Downtown will continue to develop without a major new landmark and attraction like that, too.  Many of the most successful bars and restaurants in Downtown are less than ten years old.  Its big draws like the Aeros and the concerts at Lock 3 do attract students, but they are not wholly dependent on student support.  Even Barley House is not Manny's or Thursday's.

 

I don't sit around thinking "you know, what Downtown really needs is an arena," nor do I check with the mayor (or anyone else) before posting my opinions here.  Personally, what I think it really needs is more white collar residential housing (which, incidentally, is <a href="http://www.ci.akron.oh.us/news_releases/Display.asp?RecNum=328">already on the way</a> in part, but I'd like to see even more), a form-based zoning code, and (elitist as this might be) a solution to the Mayflower Manor problem.  And, of course, existing projects need support through their fruition, such as the planned renovation of the Civic's connected buildings.  Of course I'd be excited to see the university expand into Downtown, but Akron Children's and Akron General expanding excite me far more.  If I could choose between getting an arena Downtown and the exact same dollar figure in investment from Intuitive Surgical, Medtronic, Illumina, Cardinal Health, or some other private sector employer that would have the potential to be a real image win for Akron's biotech sector, I'd take the less-well-known private sector employer in a heartbeat.  I disagree with Tom on the whole "separation of town and gown" worldview, but I simply can't muster the passion for this one issue that he has.

 

So please add a line of code:

 

40 Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but it won't be the end of the world either way.

50 Goto 10

 

You have the classic distorted if not perverted view of the concept of Town-and -Gown. The concept is about a university's intellectual, academic and research relationship with its entire community and not contaminated capitol improvement projects with parochial downtown politicians over any structure. Your view is so typically "Akron" and I disagree with it.

 

Tom, the way you've failed to engage with my view shows that you don't even understand what my view is, so your claim that it's "distorted" and/or "perverted" is risible.  (Indeed, I took no ultimate position on the site of any putative arena, since the amount of information that I admit I don't know would render that an ultracrepidarian exercise.)  Calling my view "typically 'Akron'" is equally risible: my worldviews were formed long before I moved to this city, or even to Northeast Ohio, and I would hardly say I've undergone any significant inculturation here.  Incidentally, not to be too much of a narcissistic prestige whore on the Internet, but my law school was significantly more highly nationally regarded than Akron U (oops, pardon me, the University of Akron ... or should I capitalize the definite article, too?), and was part of a sprawling, amoeboid campus that was heavily interspersed with private property.  Its boundaries, to the extent they had any real relevance, probably looked like a gerrymandered Congressional district.  I certainly never concerned myself with any official lines of demarcation between the university and Charlottesville.  Therefore, your focus on the geographic cohesiveness of the UA campus and its physical and psychological insularity vis-à-vis the rest of Akron as some kind of driver of the institution's prestige has always seemed misdirected and acarpous to me.  Your obtractuous philotheoparoptesism of anyone who dares question the essential tenet of your crusade likewise makes you appear a revanchist ideologue, not a concerned citizen.

 

It's OK, though.  You apparently went to UA, and we don't expect that much from their graduates, because it's not a sufficiently geographically distinct and insular campus within the city in which it lies, which of course is the sine qua non of any elite university. :roll:

 

Tone down the ascerbic rhetoric and the thin-skinned cavils about grammatical precision on the Internet.  (If nothing else, you reveal a certain imprevision by correcting someone on "Akron U" while simultaneously speaking to me of "capitol improvement" projects in a sentence that is also at least a grammatical misdemeanor.)  You can disagree with someone without being disagreeable.  However, if you're going to stake out such an extreme position (i.e., that regardless of cost, infrastructure support, and other tangible factors, any new UA arena should be built on "campus proper" because it "belongs" there, and "campus proper" can never include any land in Downtown Akron), you're not going to convince many people by simply repeating your asseverations ad nauseam, no matter how stridently--or artfully--you express your animadversion.

 

Have you personally had some bad experience with the city government of Akron that makes you despise it so?  Has the Plusquellic administration wronged some other civic institution or private-sector partner that tried to work with the city government and was betrayed for its naïvete?  Do you have any evidence that Proenza and/or Curtis share your separationist view (particularly in light of the above maps that others linked in response to your initial definition of "campus proper")?  Has some Lovecraftian Ancient One from beyond time and space promised you power, riches, and women if you succeed in impeding the siting of any UA arena in Downtown?  Whence comes this chip, and how did it get so deeply lodged in your shoulder?

^ that's just a fancy way of saying "Goto 10"

Gramarye, I have to say that your post looks like a thesaurus threw up on this site. Did you write it with a quill?

 

James Mathews, the said map of which you spoke is in error. UA has just confirmed so to me and added that they do not own land on Main Street other than the Polsky Building. It's one thing to have an opinion and quite another to base it on false information.

 

By the way, I have much love and commitment for downtown Akron. I have volunteered for many downtown events and continue to do so and I support the mayor and when he and I disagree we are both very clear with one another and don't consider each other hateful or vitriolic. I have also volunteered for many supportive services in the greater Akron and Summit County Community. However, I don't blindly support anyone or institution and that includes The University of Akron. Redefining your opponent's position in a debate has always been a cheap shot by those who have dishonest, hidden or hostile agendas. Being steadfast is not being vitriolic. And recognizing boundaries between the campus and downtown does not equal virulent hatred of the city. And since a couple of you have a penchant for using loaded language and high sounding words when debating, here's one that applies to you: demagoguery.

AJ: I'm really not taking a position on where any new UA arena should be built.  I'm not taking a position on when.  Heck, I'm not even taking a position on *if* a new UA arena should be built.  I have no opinion on the matter as now because the kind of things I'd care about are things like infrastructure support, construction costs, use and marketing studies, the potential need for eminent domain (a power that I'm always leery about using), and other things that I haven't seen, if they've been considered and analyzed in any official form at all.  Those are the things that would inform my decision, and I lack that information.

 

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years.  I think a UA arena would fit in fine in Downtown.  Also, as I said above, thinking fourth-dimensionally, building a new UA arena in Downtown would visibly expand the borders of "campus proper" to include the arena.  That said, I also think that Downtown will continue to develop without a major new landmark and attraction like that, too.  Many of the most successful bars and restaurants in Downtown are less than ten years old.  Its big draws like the Aeros and the concerts at Lock 3 do attract students, but they are not wholly dependent on student support.  Even Barley House is not Manny's or Thursday's.

 

I don't sit around thinking "you know, what Downtown really needs is an arena," nor do I check with the mayor (or anyone else) before posting my opinions here.  Personally, what I think it really needs is more white collar residential housing (which, incidentally, is <a href="http://www.ci.akron.oh.us/news_releases/Display.asp?RecNum=328">already on the way</a> in part, but I'd like to see even more), a form-based zoning code, and (elitist as this might be) a solution to the Mayflower Manor problem.  And, of course, existing projects need support through their fruition, such as the planned renovation of the Civic's connected buildings.  Of course I'd be excited to see the university expand into Downtown, but Akron Children's and Akron General expanding excite me far more.  If I could choose between getting an arena Downtown and the exact same dollar figure in investment from Intuitive Surgical, Medtronic, Illumina, Cardinal Health, or some other private sector employer that would have the potential to be a real image win for Akron's biotech sector, I'd take the less-well-known private sector employer in a heartbeat.  I disagree with Tom on the whole "separation of town and gown" worldview, but I simply can't muster the passion for this one issue that he has.

 

So please add a line of code:

 

40 Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but it won't be the end of the world either way.

50 Goto 10

 

You have the classic distorted if not perverted view of the concept of Town-and -Gown. The concept is about a university's intellectual, academic and research relationship with its entire community and not contaminated capitol improvement projects with parochial downtown politicians over any structure. Your view is so typically "Akron" and I disagree with it.

I do find myself taken aback somewhat at Tom's virulent hatred of the city itself outside of the University, particularly Downtown, given what Downtown has become in the last few years. 

 

I just really started reading this thread and, admittedly, I keep reading because of what Gramarye describes above.  It's one of those really bizzare things that lends itself to (IMO) high comedy while reading an internet forum.

 

I just started getting to know Akron the past month or so since I've been working here.  Oddly, despite growing up almost as close to Akron as I was to Cleveland, I had pretty much never been here and knew nothing about it.  So my first impression when I went into the city was "Oh, that's pretty cool.  Campus is adjacent to downtown."  Kind of boxed in by the valley and surrounding freeways, it seemed more compact and connected than say, Cleveland and Cleveland State.  That was about it...I still don't really have much of a feel for it.

 

Then I read this thread and the vitriol from Tom regarding the arena potentially being built off campus in downtown Akron was amusing to me.  Had I not been to Akron, I might have thought downtown Akron and Akron U's campus were pretty seperate.  Frankly, I'm not exactly sure where one starts and the other ends.  So I don't really understand what the argument is about, or at least I have no idea what there is to get so worked up about.  It's not like they're considering a site out by the Rubber Bowl.

 

 

Had I not been to Akron, I might have thought downtown Akron and Akron U's campus were pretty seperate.  Frankly, I'm not exactly sure where one starts and the other ends.

 

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,15165.30.html#ixzz1WZHCGUjd

 

That is your problem right there. There is a distinction between The University of Akron (BTW - It is not called Akron U) and downtown Akron and the last thing our UA wants to do is look like a cheap version of Cleveland State. We are an urban campus and we are proud to look like a distinct campus. Anything less than that is a knock off university deserving of little respect and recognition and saying so is not vitriol against downtown Akron. Quit putting words in another's mouth.

 

Ah yes...glad you didn't disappoint in your response!

 

While there may be a distinction, I can't tell what it is.  And apparently, by reading this thread, you and others had to verify where campus officially ends and begins.  So magical lines on a map may technically be a distinction, but practically, I can't tell the difference.  So again, not sure what your point is.  Akron is an urban campus, and having blurred lines between campus and downtown only supports that. 

 

As for word in one's mouth, I merely describe the tone of your position.  That's not putting words in your mouth; that's my description of you and your posts.  Although I am not sure why I would expect you to get that from my post, considering you seem to be having a hard time understanding the posts and positions of others. 

 

Anyway, with that said, please continue with your vitriolic posts!

This thread is unlocked but moderators will be watching. Please continue with discussions of the arena ONLY.

Sorry to pull this out of the heap with no new news, but I was surfing around and came across some of the renderings and plans done years ago:

 

"OSports has designed an arena/offi ce complex for the newly updated downtown of the City of Akron. The arena has approximately 12,000 seats, including approximately 26 private suites situated above the main concourse level. The base of the arena includes ample retail space to complement the adjacent entertainment district.

Additionally, a flexible number of offi ce and/or residential levels were included above the two level mall/atrium to provide additional use.

The facade was designed to have the same look and feel to match Canal Park and the general area, in order to create an unbroken sports and recreation area."

 

http://www.osportsarch.com/Portfolio.aspx

 

 

 

 

Looks good to me, and it would definitely be better than seeking the current stretch of parking lots along S. Main. Replacing that parking for events at the new arena and for Downtown business and nightlife in general might be an issue, however. I wonder if they could add any additional floors to the Polsky deck?

 

The other question concerns what UA is going to do about the JAR. They have been looking at E. Exchange west of Rt. 8 for its replacement, on land adjacent to InfoCision Stadium. Akron doesn't need two new arenas, and since the Zips would be the most probable anchor, UA is likely to have the final word on where this ultimately ends up.

Looks good to me, and it would definitely be better than seeking the current stretch of parking lots along S. Main. Replacing that parking for events at the new arena and for Downtown business and nightlife in general might be an issue, however. I wonder if they could add any additional floors to the Polsky deck?

 

The other question concerns what UA is going to do about the JAR. They have been looking at E. Exchange west of Rt. 8 for its replacement, on land adjacent to InfoCision Stadium. Akron doesn't need two new arenas, and since the Zips would be the most probable anchor, UA is likely to have the final word on where this ultimately ends up.

 

Polsky deck might be able to be added to. The Polsky building has that capability. If you see the roof of the building it has the columns popping through it that can be built onto.

 

 

Yes, I don't see them building two different new arenas. It would have to be a collaboration if there was one built downtown.

^Very interesting and insightful. I'm sure UA would like to keep all of its athletic facilities together in one quadrant of campus, particularly with the baseball, football, and soccer stadiums close by. Nevertheless, there is something to also be said for having a multi-purpose general arena downtown, particularly if it regularly hosts events other than college and high school basketball games, fostering year-round traffic and economic support for Downtown Akron entertainment, living and nightlife in the process. It does also seem that the economic impact would be far more significant along  South Main and South High rather than on East Exchange and Rt. 8.

 

Plus it's not like a downtown arena wouldn't still be within the footprint and influence of UA's main campus, both of which extend well into the heart of downtown via Polsky's and recently-constructed student-centered housing. Also, I presume the mens' and women's teams would continue to practice in the sports quadrant within the proposed renovated JAR facilities, but host their actual games within the downtown arena.

 

Maybe the new arena could even be equipped for ice hockey? Now wouldn't that be something? An Akron Zips Ice Hockey team?  :-)

 

I really am leaning toward this as the option I would choose at this point, if I really had any say. But who knows when we'll see action. Too bad we can't just "house move" the Wolstein Center down from Cleveland since CSU seems to be looking to unload it somehow.

Seeing that that plat stretches from Exchange to State, this plan would not only require the complete demolition of the Mayflower, but also of the Kaiser and Evans buildings as well.  That might be a little overkill.  The Mayflower is a salvageable building with a lot of history, and Kaiser and Evans are obviously not Class A office space but aren't exactly derelicts, either.  Whether arena or otherwise, I'd prefer to see demolition and infill go from the south wall of Mayflower to the north wall of Kaiser.  (The buildings immediately south of Mayflower are significantly more ramshackle and expendable, and the rest of that expanse is just surface lots and one sparsely-traveled public street.)

Seeing that that plat stretches from Exchange to State, this plan would not only require the complete demolition of the Mayflower, but also of the Kaiser and Evans buildings as well.  That might be a little overkill.  The Mayflower is a salvageable building with a lot of history, and Kaiser and Evans are obviously not Class A office space but aren't exactly derelicts, either.  Whether arena or otherwise, I'd prefer to see demolition and infill go from the south wall of Mayflower to the north wall of Kaiser.  (The buildings immediately south of Mayflower are significantly more ramshackle and expendable, and the rest of that expanse is just surface lots and one sparsely-traveled public street.)

 

The Mayflower is still shown in those plans. They are also showing a whole new retail & office complex. With this economy, I agree that they could probably nix that part of the plans and locate the arena in the now vacant lots and tear the buildings down up to The Mayflower.

 

Maybe the new arena could even be equipped for ice hockey? Now wouldn't that be something? An Akron Zips Ice Hockey team?  :-)

 

Your wish has been granted!

 

Ack, I did miss the Mayflower's hidden-in-plain-sight grey box.  But I was right about the Kaiser & Evans demolitions.

 

I wonder what the vacancy rate in those buildings is.  They still look solid on the outside to me, but if they were hollow shells inside, I guess I'd be a little more OK with seeing them go.  The Pita Pit and Karma Cafe could pretty easily find other spots nearby, I'd imagine.  But I think those buildings are still largely in use, even though the downtown office market overall is a bit soft.

Ack, I did miss the Mayflower's hidden-in-plain-sight grey box.  But I was right about the Kaiser & Evans demolitions.

 

I wonder what the vacancy rate in those buildings is.  They still look solid on the outside to me, but if they were hollow shells inside, I guess I'd be a little more OK with seeing them go.  The Pita Pit and Karma Cafe could pretty easily find other spots nearby, I'd imagine.  But I think those buildings are still largely in use, even though the downtown office market overall is a bit soft.

 

"The Evans Building (333-337 S. Main) has been home to a succession of financial institutions since 1915. But the property is most important for what's no longer here. It was the site of Henry Clark's Tavern, where the election of Akron's first mayor, Seth Iredell, occurred on June 14, 1836. Look for the commemorative plaque facing Exchange Street."

http://www.akronhistory.org/didyouknow.htm

Ack, I did miss the Mayflower's hidden-in-plain-sight grey box.  But I was right about the Kaiser & Evans demolitions.

 

 

I desperately want a new arena for Akron, but It would be really stupid and unnecessary to tear down buildings for this purpose.

Only buildings i would expect to be torn down are the ones closer to the Mayfower. I feel there is plenty of space for an arena on those parking lots. Perhaps the Primos bar could stay. But everything up to that should be knocked down.  There probably needs to be a point person assigned to get all the parties involved to coordinate this. This sounds like a job for dave liebereth, since he's now retired from city gov but has all the important connections to move this forward.

Ack, I did miss the Mayflower's hidden-in-plain-sight grey box.  But I was right about the Kaiser & Evans demolitions.

 

I desperately want a new arena for Akron, but It would be really stupid and unnecessary to tear down buildings for this purpose.

 

Depends on which buildings.  I think the buildings immediately south of the Mayflower would be forgotten within weeks, with no loss to the built environment or the city's history.

 

I would move the arena a little bit north in that diagram, leave the Kaiser and Evans buildings standing, and shrink the retail complex or move it to the corner of High and Exchange (where the KeyBank ATM in the middle of the parking lot is now).  For parking, as noted, Downtown is not currently lacking for it, but if there were a need for more, there is some space between this site and the railroad tracks (some surface lots and the Printer's Club building) that could be good sites for parking garages if the demand were there (e.g., if an arena were actually coming in, and possibly if there were some development beginning to take shape for the Beacon Journal buildings against the tracks southeast of Broadway & Exchange).

Ack, I did miss the Mayflower's hidden-in-plain-sight grey box.  But I was right about the Kaiser & Evans demolitions.

 

I desperately want a new arena for Akron, but It would be really stupid and unnecessary to tear down buildings for this purpose.

 

Depends on which buildings.  I think the buildings immediately south of the Mayflower would be forgotten within weeks, with no loss to the built environment or the city's history.

 

Right. I should've clarified my concern was Evans and Kaiser.

That concept of the arena is a few years old. There has been additional interest in that lot of land on main street. Last year the schipper group developed conceptual drawings for a 7 story office building at the corner of main and buchtel. I believe it was expandable to 10-12 stories if the need was there.

 

Ideally, I'd prefer to see an arena there but if there were a need for office space by a medium to large company in downtown I'd accept that. I enjoy seeing multi-leveled (5 stories +) buildings in a downtown setting and Akron could use a few more.

An interesting admission in this article that indicates the city is still pushing and planning for a downtown arena.

 

Yanni beat me by 12 seconds on posting the same thing.

 

Apparently County is pushing too, Nov 4th ballot issue to be put before council for a sales tax increase to build a 9000 seat arena across from Canal Park.

Solid article about this in the PD.  I'm in favor of a .25 sales tax increase for the county.  Summit is one of the lowest sales tax counties in the state and I think with how the state government is pushing back on local government to do things, this will be needed.  1/3 of this or less will be going to the new arena.  That gives Summit County government a whole lot of leeway to move additional money to other projects and services that the county oversees like Metro RTA.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/04/sports_and_entertainment_arena.html#incart_m-rpt-1

 

 

AKRON, Ohio - A $79 million, 9,000-seat arena has been proposed for downtown Akron and it would be paid for by a 0.25 percent increase in Summit County’s sales tax.

 

The University of Akron, the county, the city of Akron and the Development Finance Authority of Summit County (formerly the Summit County Port Authority) are working together to create the arena, which has been discussed for more than a decade.

 

 

 

Solid article about this in the PD.  I'm in favor of a .25 sales tax increase for the county.  Summit is one of the lowest sales tax counties in the state and I think with how the state government is pushing back on local government to do things, this will be needed.  1/3 of this or less will be going to the new arena.  That gives Summit County government a whole lot of leeway to move additional money to other projects and services that the county oversees like Metro RTA.

 

 

And that will be the most important part, explain how the rest will be spent.  I did an internship with APD and the Summit County jail is horribly outdated (and that was 10 years ago).  Part of the taxes raised will go to fix the jail, the better part of revenue raised by the sales tax increase goes to services, the arena is kind of a bonus from it and a potential revenue generated.  Assuming the normal impact, a few new restaurants, specialty stores, more foot traffic, that would just kick right back into the revenue stream.

 

The rate hike would still leave Summit County below the majority, 61 counties have a sales tax of 7.25% or higher.

Oh wow....arena talk! Please please please get this done guys.

 

Racing over to Zipsnation.org!!!

The arena is being proposed for exactly the location most of us thought it would and should, except for that one guy a couple years ago who fanatically insisted the arena should be on campus. He even had bumper stickers made.

The arena is being proposed for exactly the location most of us thought it would and should, except for that one guy a couple years ago who fanatically insisted the arena should be on campus. He even had bumper stickers made.

 

Because of the silence, I'm assuming that said gentleman is no longer with us.

 

Anyhow, word from Zipsnation is that the idea is already being met with derision because of the tax increase. Oh Akron, please prove me wrong and get something done at a pace that is other than glacial.

A 9,000-seat sports and entertainment arena is proposed for downtown Akron

 

AKRON, Ohio - A $79 million, 9,000-seat arena has been proposed for downtown Akron and it would be paid for by a 0.25 percent increase in Summit County’s sales tax.

 

The University of Akron, the county, the city of Akron and the Development Finance Authority of Summit County (formerly the Summit County Port Authority) are working together to create the arena, which has been discussed for more than a decade.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/04/sports_and_entertainment_arena.html#incart_m-rpt-1

 

 

 

 

Akron scrambling after arena announcement; Mayflower’s future, parking among issues being studied

 

By Stephanie Warsmith

Beacon Journal staff writer

Published: April 24, 2014 - 08:04 PM | Updated: April 25, 2014 - 07:50 AM

 

The announcement of a proposed new arena in downtown Akron leaves the city with possibilities and challenges.

 

The arena would be a new draw for downtown, helping enhance the central entertainment district that already is home to Canal Park stadium, Lock 3 and the Akron Civic Theatre.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/break-news/akron-scrambling-after-arena-announcement-mayflower-s-future-parking-among-issues-being-studied-1.483250

 

University of Akron trustees take step toward building arena in downtown Akron

 

By Stephanie Warsmith

Beacon Journal staff writer

Published: April 23, 2014 - 01:18 PM | Updated: April 24, 2014 - 12:16 PM

 

For years, the main questions about a potential Akron arena were: Should it go on the University of Akron campus or downtown, and how would it be funded?

 

Those questions were answered Tuesday, with the announcement of a tightly guarded plan for a $76 million project in downtown Akron to be paid for by a county sales tax hike.

 

http://www.ohio.com/news/university-of-akron-trustees-take-step-toward-building-arena-in-downtown-akron-1.482867

Oh no....

 

 

Would you be willing to approve a tax that would allow a new arena to be built in downtown Akron?

 

Yes 43 % (521)

 

No 57 % (693)

 

Total number of votes: 1214

 

ohio.com

I wouldn't necessarily assume anything from a newspaper poll.  But yes, any new tax is going to be something of a tough sell in the current political environment.  And even I haven't completely made up my mind yet because I want to see the details of what else is included in the services-funding portion of the levy.

Also that poll started when there were no details in the article.  The article didn't list the rate hike amount and just made it sound like that was the whole purpose of the rate hike.  I would expect the county to explain the need for this increase and highlight more what they plan to do with the increased funds.

 

A knee jerk reaction of people feeling this is a give-away to the UofA certainly is understandable. Given that, i think that polling is fairly positive as the yes votes are above 40%. 

 

I've got to believe Lebron will have a hand in this at some point.  Especially since he'll likely be a user of the facility. But its hard to have any real say in the matter if he's not putting some $ to the project.  So that should be interesting to watch. 

The parking lost can be easily replaced with a single garage. Line the sidewalk perimeter of the garage with leasable spaces and you've enhanced the urban setting. Of course, if Akron built a downtown streetcar and encouraged transit-oriented, mixed-use development along it, Akron wouldn't miss the lost parking spaces.

I always assumed for this location that the primary parking would from the Polsky's deck with an obligatory skywalk.  That should be good enough to serve the students. That plus students walking or taking their zippy trolley should be sufficient for 3-4000+ students that may attend an event.  The Oneils parking deck is pretty expansive and likely will have good vacancy when the arena will be in use. On-street parking is fairly plentiful after 5pm as well.  I guess a smallish parking deck behind the Mayflower could be helpful but not really needed.

 

However, if they are assuming that a conversion of the Mayflower to a hotel with the arena, then yes, a parking deck will definitely be needed and this becomes a huge powerblock of arena/hotel/parking garage and like KJP stated leasable space on the outskirts.  That would be pretty transformative on a street level basis if this were to happen.

Oh no....

 

 

Would you be willing to approve a tax that would allow a new arena to be built in downtown Akron?

 

Yes 43 % (521)

 

No 57 % (693)

 

Total number of votes: 1214

 

ohio.com

 

If they did a poll during the last Mayoral recall I bet it would be the same results, with 55% saying YES to a recall. The ACTUAL results were 75% said NO. Ohio.bomb is notorious for badmouthing anything positive.

I've got to believe Lebron will have a hand in this at some point.  Especially since he'll likely be a user of the facility. But its hard to have any real say in the matter if he's not putting some $ to the project.  So that should be interesting to watch. 

 

Great point. LeBron, the X-factor in this.

Just do what Toledo and Grand Rapids did, and it will be good. They did bang-up jobs with mid-size urban arenas.