Will we say goodbye to our Sacramento Kings?
- Thread starter Purple Reign
- Start date
Thanx, all.
With the current ARCO, there are:
1) Physical repair issues (new roof and possibly other major physcial plant fixes)
2) Safety issues (lower concourse width [concession lines also block concourse], upper "walkway" width, including next to nothing at corners)
3) Flexibility issues (to allow major events in a row: arena conversion for hockey or other major events, speed of conversion)
4) Patron comfort issues (concourse width, seat comfort, seat spacing, number of bathroom fixtures, concession options, arena visuals - like scoreboards, limited content, sight lines)
5) Event participant comfort issues (locker rooms, plumbing)
6) Age issues (some ancient equipment moved over from Arco I and still in use, plywood construction of bleachers [limited life], potential increase of O&M costs to run the facility)
7) Operational issues (very small kitchen space, limited concession areas, poor sound system [I can't even hear the post-game interviews from my lower level seat])
8) Profitability issues (for making money owning an NBA franchise: insufficient number of suites/no club seats, diversity and number of concession areas)
9) NBA issues (the arena is not up to league standards and having a solid arena facility is that organization's mandate for a team's participation)
10) Insufficient facility to host super-events (Arco is not equipped to handle the NBA all star game and other super-events)
11) Major fix impossible (consultant report stated clearly that retrofitting to address the issues is not possible)
12) New downtown location better economically for the region (triple the economic impact/job creation of the current location)
13) Arco is operating (because it has to for now) but it's days are numbered. The Arena will almost certainly be leveled in a few years anyway (regardless of the outcome of the election)
All of these problems have led experts to declare that Arco has reached economic obsolescence.
Now THAT's a pretty good list, and that was the goal here.
How can this not convince County voters of the NEED to do something now, irrespective of the whole situation with the Kings?
With the current ARCO, there are:
1) Physical repair issues (new roof and possibly other major physcial plant fixes)
2) Safety issues (lower concourse width [concession lines also block concourse], upper "walkway" width, including next to nothing at corners)
3) Flexibility issues (to allow major events in a row: arena conversion for hockey or other major events, speed of conversion)
4) Patron comfort issues (concourse width, seat comfort, seat spacing, number of bathroom fixtures, concession options, arena visuals - like scoreboards, limited content, sight lines)
5) Event participant comfort issues (locker rooms, plumbing)
6) Age issues (some ancient equipment moved over from Arco I and still in use, plywood construction of bleachers [limited life], potential increase of O&M costs to run the facility)
7) Operational issues (very small kitchen space, limited concession areas, poor sound system [I can't even hear the post-game interviews from my lower level seat])
8) Profitability issues (for making money owning an NBA franchise: insufficient number of suites/no club seats, diversity and number of concession areas)
9) NBA issues (the arena is not up to league standards and having a solid arena facility is that organization's mandate for a team's participation)
10) Insufficient facility to host super-events (Arco is not equipped to handle the NBA all star game and other super-events)
11) Major fix impossible (consultant report stated clearly that retrofitting to address the issues is not possible)
12) New downtown location better economically for the region (triple the economic impact/job creation of the current location)
13) Arco is operating (because it has to for now) but it's days are numbered. The Arena will almost certainly be leveled in a few years anyway (regardless of the outcome of the election)
All of these problems have led experts to declare that Arco has reached economic obsolescence.
Now THAT's a pretty good list, and that was the goal here.
How can this not convince County voters of the NEED to do something now, irrespective of the whole situation with the Kings?
Ya and not to mention how much money the city would make with an ALL STAR game. OMG! Maybe the NBA should come out and say they would have the NBA Allstar game here in 201X when the Arena opens. That would change some business owners mind. Maybe toss in the NCAA commitment for a Sweet 16. ARCO will never be that - New awesome arena has a pretty good chance to do both. Hypotheticals of course....
Don't get down PR... I think right now the strong no people are loudest. I am not tossing in the towel until I hear the results. I think the same sometimes but just gotta stay positive and keep trying to get support.
some links...its all I have time for:
http://www.facilityplanners.com/news/pdf/Suite%20Dreams.pdf This is 4 years ago.
http://www.nba.com/media/kings/ARCO_Flaws_web.pdf
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/270255_nbasonics15.html Interesting article on Key Arena and the Sonics (NBA economics)
What I have not yet been able to find is the article the Bee did on events passing by Arco.
This is just for fun. There is already a reuse plan for the 185 acres in Natomas, wltho it does not rule out an arena there. What I found interesting is the geography of season ticket holders on page 15. The bay area is third highest after Sac & Placer Counties!
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/SED/North_Natomas_Adaptive_Reuse.pdf
Also fun if you have Flash plugin 7, is the website for the architectural (one) firm that came out and took a look at Arco. They are mentioned in an article above and they designed Stockton's arena among others. If you go in and find "Our Work", then "Play" on the menu it takes you to some designs (mouse over the row of dots). There's several views of each project. Holy crap, does Arco look like a dump compared to these (including the college arena)! People ought to see what we could have.
http://www.360architects.com/
http://www.facilityplanners.com/news/pdf/Suite%20Dreams.pdf This is 4 years ago.
http://www.nba.com/media/kings/ARCO_Flaws_web.pdf
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/270255_nbasonics15.html Interesting article on Key Arena and the Sonics (NBA economics)
What I have not yet been able to find is the article the Bee did on events passing by Arco.
This is just for fun. There is already a reuse plan for the 185 acres in Natomas, wltho it does not rule out an arena there. What I found interesting is the geography of season ticket holders on page 15. The bay area is third highest after Sac & Placer Counties!
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/SED/North_Natomas_Adaptive_Reuse.pdf
Also fun if you have Flash plugin 7, is the website for the architectural (one) firm that came out and took a look at Arco. They are mentioned in an article above and they designed Stockton's arena among others. If you go in and find "Our Work", then "Play" on the menu it takes you to some designs (mouse over the row of dots). There's several views of each project. Holy crap, does Arco look like a dump compared to these (including the college arena)!
People ought to see what we could have.http://www.360architects.com/
Last edited: