AUSTIN | Moody Center (U.T. Basketball Arena) | Complete
 

I saw someone talking about this on Horns247 and, admittedly, this is what caused me to sign up for a Statesman subscription. I'm really interested in this project. Replacing the Erwin Center will be one of the biggest things to ever happen to Austin. The question is: what will the city of Austin do when UT doesn't need a big arena that doubles as a premier entertainment venue? The answer seems to be that they'll have to build their own, which is the best thing for Austin in the long run, IMO.

Here's the article:

Summary for those who can't read it:

Anonymous inside sources suggest that this is the location that's generating the most interest inside the athletic department. But there's all kinds of issues to be worked out such as turnover with the city government and at UT. Also, the site could be needed for future Dell Medical School expansion. So it's too early to (publicly, at least) name this site the leader. The South Shore is also mentioned as a possible site for a multipurpose arena but that's more speculation on the Stateman's part than anything coming from the city or from UT.

It's possible it's an intentional leak to scare the council and the city that UT is willing to just build their own small arena. Austin would not only lose out on a way to build a modern arena but it would lose the one they have now which is way to small for a city as large and with the same profile as Austin.

That's a lot of concerts, ACC graduations and misc events the city would lose.

It seems fair that the city and UT split the cost of an area given the civic value it serves. I'm betting Zimmerman is going to vote against with the impression that no one in his district goes to concerts.

Looking at the lot south of Myers Stadium, I think Red River would have to be re-routed to make room for an arena.

I'm split on this issue. It'd be a smart idea for CoA to team with UT to build an arena. It'd save them money in the long run. But as an avid UT fan, I just don't want my team playing in a 20,000-seat half-empty cavern for half their games. That ruins the atmosphere.

That's a good point. It very well could be. And it should scare city officials. Because without UT as a partner, the city will have to fund an arena all by themselves and that's no easy task considering all of the things the city has on its wish list to pay for.

But I'm with lzppjb. I'm tired of the cavernous arena for UT basketball games. I would like to see something more intimate. And this spot is perfect. It's right there by the soccer stadium, baseball stadium, and football stadium. And students could get there more easily. They wouldn't have to cross MLK Blvd.

On the other hand, I don't want to see Austin not have a legitimate multipurpose arena and them paying for one on their own seems very difficult to imagine. Maybe they can pair with a sponsor and give them naming rights in exchange for them paying for part of the cost?

How about pairing with MLS and getting an indoor soccer arena? :D

I'd still rather see Gregory gym renovated. Sure, it won't ever fit 20k people, but it could probably be expanded to fit ~10k (it currently supports 4k). That would be the *best* spot to get students to come to the games.

The COA needs to find a way to build it's own venue.

I think the best approach would be for UT to build its own, smaller arena on UT property and let COA build its own arena elsewhere. I like the site east of the swim center. It complicates things way too much for UT and COA to collaborate on something that would either be too large or too small. There will have to be 2 separate arenas.

S

From what I've been told by family members who are reasonably big money donors.. this is not a scare tactic.

The University is planning on building an on-campus arena of a size that is reasonable for use as a basketball facility for the University with a large chunk of funding being re-routed towards the South-end zone expansion of the football stadium.

They aren't going to increase the size of the stadium so much as build more box seats and several more club level seats that bring in real money for the University and Longhorn foundation.

I think any chance of partnering with UT for an arena may have sailed for the city... the question then becomes does it make sense to build a giant concert venue in Austin without a major sports team tied to it?

Yes lets get a NHL team and an NBA team. :cheers:

We won't get an NBA team with the Spurs so close. Hockey is a tough sell in Texas, but the Stars seem to be doing well in Cedar Park.

My wife and I go to the Texas Stars games often. They tend to almost sell out for every game. Its an AHL club that is owned by the Dallas stars. It'd be unlikely to get an NHL team. Although, Texas could use another.

Texas could still partner with city of Austin on new basketball venue
 

B

Patterson's legacy is already defined.

Rocket Pack guy at football games, DJ's at Basketball games. Consultant speak everywhere, Disney consulting group telling a bunch of long-time fans and alums what it is they really want at a football game. Going so far as to say publicly that winning isn't what people will remember, it's if someone was nice to them. Or they saw an idiot in a jetpack evidently.

This clown is turning UT sports into everything wrong with the NBA and stripping any character that college athletics has away.

Hopefully he isn't long for this job, but I worry that the football team turning things around will give him job security, and revenue will likely increase on his watch.

Oh, I thought you were joking.

I'm not seeing how rocket pack guys at football games, DJs at basketball games, or getting Disney consulting group to tell long-time fans and alums what they want at a football game are bad things. For one thing, everybody does the rocket pack guy or parachute guy thing. It's commonplace in college football. It absolutely does not diminish Texas football culture in any way. Second, UT basketball games have been dead, boring events for years because DeLoss catered to blue-haired retirees who just want to have a nice calm evening and not make any noise rather than instilling an atmosphere of youth, fun, and noise. What Patterson really could do to cement his reputation as a positive, culture-changing figure is increase the size of the student section and drive some old the old fogies higher in the stands where they belong. Thirdly, same goes for football. Most long-time football fans and alumni are terrible fans. They're snotty and entitled. They don't think anything is required of them. When I go to games, I don't sit down or shut up for the entire game, no matter who is around me. These assholes leave shortly after half-time, are detached from the team, don't know any of the players' names, and don't think fans impact the game. They need to be told what to do, if not kicked out of the stadium completely. I blame DeLoss Dodds for being too old, soft, arrogant, and clueless. Just having the name "Texas" isn't going to be enough. Other programs are raising their profiles and to keep up we need to make some changes. If older folks can't cope with that change, they can keep their butts in Houston or wherever they live. We don't need them.

Jetpack guy is not done everywhere. It's stupid and gimmicky. I hated it the first time I saw it. I'm surprised they rolled him out there for every damn home game.

I feel less strongly about the DJ. It's stupid, but whatever. Basketball needs a lot of work, so the DJ does not rank too highly on my list of hatred currently.

It has been done by Michigan, the winningest and most historic football program in the country. And I don't see how it's any different than parachute guy, which everyone does.

Anyway, kids like stupid gimmicks. Maybe we did it too much but that's no serious knock on Patterson. And, let's be honest, we needed as many attractions to get people out to the ballpark as possible last year because the team sucked.

And Michigan sucked last year. I don't care if they did it. Did they do it every dang game?

And you answered the issue with your last statement. Win. That's all we need. Win and stick with traditions. I hope to God they nix the jetpack BS next season. Every fan I know agrees. Only kids and their moms (not even all moms) enjoy that.

I go to a game to watch good football. I want to hear the band and I want to yell my head off. I want to see Bevo, Smokey, Big Bertha and the Pom Squad. I don't pay money to see Jetpack guy or hear Taco Bell gongs from a giant, deafening jumbotron.

Move the band back to a prominent location. Destroy Godzillatron. Until that can be done, at least turn the damn thing down and don't play crappy music over our band and fans. Move Bevo to where he can be seen.

Fans are not encouraged to make noise because they are constantly drowned out by the advertisements blaring out all the time. Jetpack guy is an advertisement for Mighty Fine, btw.

I used to go to every home game, some road games and the bowl game. I go to maybe 1 or 2 games a year now. Them sucking has had a part to play in that. But so does the atmosphere. It sucks.

I don't know if it would be indoor, but you have to think an MLS size venue at the Statesman HQ spot for big shows and soccer matches would be incredible.

That location would probably win Austin the 24th team, if only we get Michael Dell involved ...

The Statesman plot is the perfect spot for an arena and MLS type venue. It needs to be a join effort between the City of Austin, Travis County, and UT.

Both venues could be used for concerts/trade shows/conventions and would be a great move for Rodeo Austin in my opinion. I know the Houston Rodeo was a part of the design and financing of NRG Stadium in Houston along with the city, county and Texans. Seems like Rodeo Austin would be a great partner to have on board.

Real question would be is how much push back/influence would the Travis Heights neighborhood have?

The only thing keeping that spot from handling an arena/stadium is the traffic. Entrance and exit would all be right on Congress. It'd be a bit of a nightmare. They'd have to build that bridge to connect Trinity to the east side of the lot.

Traffic can be pretty bad on Congress already, particularly heading south in the afternoon. That could pose some problems for downtown-bound traffic. The bridge across the river would pretty much be a must to help out.

It wouldn't be a bad idea to have one more road crossing the river Like Trinity. For a city as large as Austin is there's only 5 crossings through the central core. That's counting 35 and MoPac. That leaves just 3 street crossings Congress, South 1st and Lamar. Lamar is a congested mess since the city will not widen it so that leaves South 1st and Congress, both of which are fast becoming heavy congested crossings even after peak traffic.

We do need a rail crossing there's no doubt about that but it may be in the interest of the city to consider one more road bridge especially if an arena is built on the American Statesman site and even if one is not built, a bridge would still be needed.

This post has touched on transportation moreso than the arena specifically though I mention it because while I love the idea of an arena OR an MLS stadium where the Statesman is now, I do agree about the logistics of traffic hence why I feel that another road bridge is inevitable in any event.

:yuck: If a "D.P. Hogan" ever runs for city council I will not vote for him/her! It would be a tragic waste of an incredible location with epic views if that spot were paved over with parking and a massive sports venue. And this isn't NIMBY-speak, I live north of 183. There is so much potential for that land, I just can't see putting anything monolithic on it. Of course if you're a sports enthusiast then the concept is appealing but the majority of people don't care about UT basketball, soccer, or rodeos. OMG, rodeo in downtown Austin, what a nightmare! I think you're confusing Austin with Fort Worth.

Ok...


http://gotexas.about.com/od/stocksho...xas-Rodeos.htm

http://www.rodeoaustin.com/events/live-music/


And this year they include the Beach Boys, Boyz II Men, Panic! At The Disco, and Sublime With Rome. It's not just kickers and country, although that's obviously the majority.

Read on twitter that building the arena on the statesman site is "a done deal" but not yet confirmed by other sources.

https://twitter.com/michaelcorcoran/...21502785396737

https://twitter.com/evanasmith/statu...54474507444225

I really hope the statesman is not the site of a stupid f'in arena. It would ruin this area of town more than the statesman does. As the closest neighbor to the statesman i for one will fight tooth and nail so it doesn't get built here. The only reason anybody would want a stadium built here is so they can go visit dt after the game. if you need the arena to be dt for that then i hope its not built dt because you dont belong dt with your kids who only wanna eat at some chain food joint anyways. What this neghborhood needs is a mixed use neighborhood with real character. What this city needs is the same exact thing. Build the stadium at the holly st power plant site. Better yet build it right where all the stadiums already are. Build it on ut campus, or where burger center is, or connect it to barton creek mall and then you have a mall and a stadium.

i agree, but not with Holly or Barton Creek Mall. A large public facility like this needs to be kept out of neighborhoods, which is one of many reasons I oppose the Statesman location. Most of the time it will be nothing but a hulking, hideous dead space. It's an all-or-nothing proposition, where the area is flooded with activity when there's an event, and dead when there isn't. We might as well add another convention center, except arenas are even worse. Does anyone really get anything out of the existence of the Erwin Center when they aren't attending an event there? No, it's just a waste of space. I endorse putting it right around the I-35/45 interchange in beautiful West Creeedmore, or at Loop 1 and 45 in the no-man's land of Southwest Round Rock.

Understand where you're coming from - there are a lot of poorly designed arenas that are dead most of the time just like you say (Erwin Center is a great example). But with the right approach, an arena certainly does not have to be as dead as you describe. Finding a way to integrate some mixed uses, offices, retail, residential at the street edges would make for a much better project. A new arena needs to be very public transit accessible, too, unless creating more auto traffic is the goal. Putting something like this anywhere but downtown or downtown/adjacent would be a mistake.

My biggest worry would be the traffic since Austin is so well known for not planning for effective transportation infrastructure. Other than that, I would worry about it being too suburban in character. I'd like to see it wrapped with retail, and something more than just sports jerseys and hats. I think the transportation infrastructure would have to come first for me to be ok with it, otherwise it would be a deal breaker.

For Austin to be a true big city, there needs to be an arena not just for sporting events but concerts and other events as well. The problem is there's not a lot of places near DT that can fit an arena. Building it away from DT is not desirable for a host of reasons and yes people who go to the arena should be able to get into DT easily if they choose what is so wrong with that?

The biggest problem as Kevin mentioned would be traffic and transportation. I'm sure there will be people against it. There's always people against everything that is proposed in this city. I also agree that the arena could be built with complementing uses so that it would be visited and used daily becoming an vibrant part of the surrounding area.

On a side note the Rodeo is one of Austin's largest events in terms of attendance up there with SXSW and ACL. I would definitely go if it was at a new arena since the Travis County Expo Center is kinda far and a hassle to get to. Heck an arena on the southside of the river would be awesome IMO.

I won't really have an opinion on this other than the traffic issues already mentioned until I see more detailed information. However, I'd like to see examples of stadiums that have incorporated retail or office space in the design.

Also, UT is denying they are buying the Statesman site: https://twitter.com/ralphhaurwitz/st...28999756394496

Report: Texas will purchase Austin-American statesman site for basketball venue
 

B

I agree. I oppose it being built there for three reasons.

1. Traffic. It would be a nightmare.

2. It flies in the face of what the City is trying to do with the South Shore Central Vision. At 19 acres, it's about 20% of the 97-acre South Shore Central District. I've seen conceptual plans for the area and it always showed the American-Statesman site as kind of broken up with pedestrian passageways and paseos leading to and opening up to the lake.


http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/f...rMike/SCWD.jpg


They're trying to provide more direct access to the lake and to make that whole 97-acre South Shore Central District more pedestrian friendly. Putting a big arena/parking lot at the AAS site is not going to achieve that.

3. It's prime real estate. I'd much rather see the area developed as hotels, condos, apartments, affordable housing, retail and parkland because those things (except for public parkland) would generate all kinds of property tax revenues for the City. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if UT buys the land and builds an arena, the City won't get any property tax revenue since the UT System is exempt from paying property taxes.

I just think it's a horrible choice of location.

I

From the Burnt Orange Nation article:

"However, the Statesman site would be expensive, which could explain why Patterson quoted a figure of $500 million when asked about the cost of a new arena. Patterson also wants city funding and the new mayor is at least amenable to having that discussion."

Taxpayer-funded sports arenas almost always end up being a net economic drain for cities. Where they have been most successful is in those places where they're used as a catalyst for redevelopment, and this only works if there is enough momentum and potential for redevelopment to accelerate, AND the facility is designed intelligently such that it is well integrated with its context.

South Shore will redevelop in a very attractive and economically beneficial way without needing any public funds to spur it on. It's an exceptional location that should feature the view of downtown and provide many uses for as many people as possible.

It sounds like some people would like to see it become a theme park, and that's a direction it could go, but it would change the character of the city in a fairly significant way. But I can see where it could have an arena, small amphitheater, rodeo, and even theme park type features such as a ferris wheel. If you're someone who supports moving the Travis County Fair to South Shore then why not just go all the way and install the rides and a hipster version of Big Tex holding a mug of local craft IPA?

The Brackenridge Hospital site is 14 acres. Isn't it going to be torn down when the new medical center is finished? Put the arena/concert venue there. It'd be close IH-35 and it's not that much further from UT as the Erwin Center is now.

And yes, I know the city has plans to turn that area into an "Innovation District." Let 'em find someplace else for people to "innovate."

Do you really think traffic will be that much worse for an arena, than if it is developed as South Shore?.....seems to me, no matter what is developed in this spot, it will bring significant traffic with it.

I say, bring it on......just do it well.

Yes, because right now in all of downtown, the residential population is only about 10,000 or so. Any new arena would have seating somewhere on the order of 20,000 to 25,000 people. 10,000 people living downtown come and go at all hours of the day, but an arena would be a one two punch of 20,000 to 25,000 arriving and leaving at once.

I'm rarely around the DKR Stadium to know what the traffic is like there, let alone when games are happening, but the stadium has the added benefit of not really being in a neighborhood. It also has I-35 pretty close by to help with the traffic flow and "escape routes". South Congress on the other hand is nothing like I-35. Even with a bridge across the river, you'd still be funneling traffic onto Cesar Chavez and then onto I-35.

I also cringe a little about sports venues since they're expensive and become quickly outdated and never seem to be planned very well. They're almost always built on a bet that you'll see any sort of return on them. They really are a "build it and they will come" type of development. Plus, sports franchises hold cities hostage for a ransom on funding their next stadium or upgrade to their existing one. I suppose they're a necessary evil, but I've never been a fan (literally).

I'm against putting the arena on the Statesman site because the South Shore Vision will make that area more vibrant than an arena/special events center. But I think arenas in general belong Downtown. With that said there are not a lot of sites left Downtown for large projects.

I wonder how many people commute downtown for work.

Edit: looks to be around 100,000, though I can't find a good source. This makes me think that traffic wouldn't be a huge issue since most events are outside of regular working hours.

That location would be ideal, and then the Erwin land can be converted to innovation district to make it like a swap of uses.

The Statesman site fits perfectly. Look what Detroit is doing with their new arena. They are building it as a part of retail and office space.

http://cmsimg.freep.com/apps/pbcsi.d...ments-downtown

Memphis built their arena right off Beale St and it works great for shows and sporting events.

I'm not sure why everyone is worried about it becoming a parking lot. This isn't the Astrodome. Parking garages would be build and are needed anyway. The city needs a downtown venue to keep large shows and conventions from going to San Antonio/Houston/DFW. We already have the Cedar Park Center but I'm sure no one from Buda makes the drive for a Stars game. Make it central. Build it right. It will work best for all.

^^^ That's exactly what I've envisioned...maximize use of the property. Not sure UT would put a priority on that, but we shall/would see...

If it's a joint venture, the City could put the priority on developing the surrounding area as mixed use.

I do think a downtown arena would help us land more big conventions and concerts. Would be much easier to get a DNC or RNC here with an arena in that location.

If we had an MLB team, I'd prefer a baseball stadium there. I love stadiums with downtown views, and many are going that direction.

Thank your late 90's city council for f'ing that up. Nolan Ryan and the Express wanted to put the Dell Diamond downtown, but the city didn't want the development or to give the tax breaks to make it happen. If I remember correctly, UT was ready to go in on a joint venture on that to replace the Disch as well. Baseball in downtown Austin, I can see it now and it would have been spectacular.

That's a good point. That type of land use would be consistent with the city's vision for this district...or as close as they could get with an arena.

http://www.austintexas.gov/waterfront
ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/npzd/South...ront_36x48.pdf

I'd definitely be against a half-assed effort. But, if they went all out and surrounded it with mixed use development and made sure it was a dynamic inviting design, I could see it being a positive for the city.

Minor league baseball doesn't belong in downtown. Only major league.

For real. A minor league ball club just screams "Austin: The Fresno of Texas!"

Most of what Austin offers is already minor league, at best. Save the energy and funds to do something right for once.