anchor
Will A Hockey Arena Save Detroit?
Rendering of an unofficial Detroit Red Wings hockey arena proposal: "The Old Red Barn - Reborn. New Olympia Stadium in Downtown Detroit. The goal would be to create a "Camden Yards" of hockey, working off an expanded and improved version of the Olympia seating bowl but with better concourses, amenities, accessibility, luxury suites and club seating. The exterior would be a very close replica of the original, with the white marquee and bold black lettering, similar brickwork, and a Red Wings logo front and center." (image and caption via http://newolympia.blogspot.com)
Despite filing for bankruptcy, Detroit is still on track to get a $450 million hockey arena - partially funded with public money. Host Michel Martin speaks with sportswriter Dave Zirin, who calls the move 'shameless,' and David Muller, a business reporter for the MLive Media Group in Michigan.
— npr.org
[Correction: Official images of the proposed new arena do not exist yet. The 'Old Red Barn' rendering above is an unofficial proposal via the New Olympia Stadium blog.]
Similar articles on Archinect that may interest you...
16 Comments
Sell off the city's art to support sports. Great.
Fuck sports. There is no good to be found in organized sports, none whatsoever. Fuck doping, exploitation, obscene sums of money, "points" for disabling your opponent's players, truly wretched sexism, and public funding of the entire sick system. Sports is on par with religion for brainwashing people into embracing the most horrid aspect of their personality.
Fuck sports.
No, not 'fuck sports,' but rather 'fuck publicly-funded private sports complexes'
1. This is not the design nor the location of the new hockey arena.
2. Criticism of the development, re City's bankruptcy, shows a complete lack of understanding of development financing. Funding for the project is coming from state-issued bonds that must be repaid by the developer and tax increment financing that captures the tax increment from raised property values that come as a result of the development. No existing tax dollars are being used to fund the arena. As architects, we should really try to understand how development is financed rather than have this knee-jerk reaction against new development.
3. Archinect should take a bit more responsibility before posting these "news" articles.
won, your entire point 2 explains how these sort of things have been done without critiquing whether or not this status quo operation is actually good. In my mind, if there is money available to fund a new arena then there is money available to hire teachers so Detroit Public School doesn't have to accept class sizes of up to 60 students per teacher. Why can someone not put their foot down and say that just because we've done things a certain way int he past that doesn't mean we have to keep doing them that way?
A developer stands to make money, and a corrupt official stands to get a kickback. *That* is how things have been done in Detroit and it's time to change. As architects aren't we supposed to think about how things can be different?
^ Exactly. Business as usual. Watch for civil service pensions to be eliminated because of city debt* and "necessary austerity" while this publicly-funded handout to private developers is being built.
* which will be a model adopted across the US
if there is money available to fund a new arena then there is money available to hire teachers
Again this points to a misunderstanding of how development financing works. There are no existing public funds going into the development, so money is not being used for development that could have gone to pay teachers. The public funds for the development are being created by future increases in tax assessments that would not have existed if the development did not happen. It's a bonding mechanism, and it in no way takes money from the public schools or any other public service.
This is not just Detroit. It is how development financing happens everywhere. If this project did not happen, then property tax assessments in this area would stay the same (or decrease); tax increment financing is an economic development tool that benefits both public and private interests. It creates thousands of jobs, including a boat-ton of work for architects. I simply don't understand the willful cynicism based on a misunderstanding of a concept that is in fact integral to how our profession operates.
i'd say won's point 2 is how it's supposed to be done - in theory. whether it's a good idea or not, in the case of louisville's arena, because of some pie-in-the-sky projections about what kinds of economic boost the arena would bring (projections which were questioned at the time, with the questions dismissed as naysaying), there is no way the management can meet its obligations through revenue from the TIF.
what does that mean?
well, the city guaranteed part of the financing...
the state guaranteed part of the financing...
indeed, tax dollars are being used to fund the arena.
@won -
few questions - what's going to happen to the joe? Where is this going to be located? is it going to be tied into other development (as in retail/commercial/residential)?
The location is just north of I-75 on Woodward in the Cass Park area. $450 million is going towards the construction of the arena with an additional $200 million in associated mixed use development. I think there is some skepticism that the $200 million in spin-off development will materialize, but with the construction of M-1 Rail and a genuine commitment by the downtown development community to create a more walkable downtown, it's not out of the realm of possibility. Truth is downtown Detroit development is booming right now. The momentum here, both at a grassroots, entrepreneurial level to major corporate investment, is like nothing I've witnessed here in my lifetime. It's really incredible.
In terms of the Joe, nothing has officially been determined. I think the hope is that it will be torn down for future riverfront development and provide a key connective piece along the westside of the Detroit riverwalk.
5,500 arena construction jobs and 8,300 more events center and mixed-use jobs. 58 percent more permanent job placement than the Joe offered, and a 1.8 billion economic impact on the city and state as a whole.
Plenty of publicly-funded sports complexes have thrived and brought great revenue to the city in which it was built. Cleveland with Progressive Field, San Diego with Petco Park, and even Denver with Coors Field. Comerica and Ford Field have at least kept bringing people into the city while everyone that lives in it keeps leaving, so I can only imagine that the new stadium arena will be a success, at least economically.
Maybe Detroit should fire the horse-shoer who's position hasn't been updated since 1967, or get rid of the guy in the Chief of Police's office who's sole job was to wash and gas the Chief's car.
This is a job creator and a people mover. Critics need to stop complaining and actually be excited that anybody cares enough to invest in our city anymore.
1.8 billion in economic impact...
The games will all sell out, bringing in thousands of non-residents with disposable income at least 41 times per year to frequent local businesses.
Detroit needs jobs, not civil servants with their hands out. Throwing money at failing schools, corrupting unions and a highly inefficient local government will not solve any problems. Spurring development will.
This is also a move to bring all of Detroit's four major sports team to downtown ensuring nearly year round foot-traffic to a rather blighted area.
Civil servants by definition *have* jobs. They tend to be jobs that can allow one to be middle class. Sports arenas bring minimum wage jobs in food service and janitorial that can't support a single person let alone a family.
Brainwash Koolaid, brought to you by Adidas.
donna - the existing hockey arena is already downtown in an area that doesn't need as much help - it's basically taking up space in a place that could be put to better use. moving it out on the other side of I-75 would be good for that stretch of woodward (although they could span I-75, which would help stitch together the area better...). Detroit needs a lot more help than what any sort of sports arena could possibly do, but as long as it's tied in with mixed use it would be a huge improvement over what is there now.
The Ilitch's have the money to do this on their own, and I don't see any reason why they shouldn't. Economists suggest that publicly funded arenas never pay for themselves and there would be more benefit to indiscriminately throwing public funds back to the citizenry to spend however they like than to put it into a pile of luxury boxes to enrich a team owner who is already plenty wealthy..
But I have to disagree with Donna's comments about organized sports. I find as much repellant and venal in the professional art and culture world as in professional sports, and as much art in a Red Wings game as hanging on the walls DIA. The sneers that I've seen from intellectuals about sports culture reek to me of the aesthetics of class - for some reason it is okay dismiss football's bodies moving in space as crass and inhumane, while ballerinas as poor, harassed and broken as mining donkeys are glorious and refined.
To paint in equally broad stokes: Architecture, our own high culture pursuit, succeeds on the backs of unpaid interns, works mostly for the very rich, takes our successes as ours alone and blames our failures on hollow eyed bureaucrats and monobrowed contractors too dull to understand our vision. From here we get to take the high ground on sports?
maybe if the city government was as good at what it does as the red wings are, then this amusing discussion wouldn't be taking place.
but they aren't. so please, continue.
janosh's opinion about sports is seconded.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.