Amway Center

[facilities man]

Here's an example of a small conservative city (Tulsa, OK) with a vanilla skyline consisting mostly of boxy towers and older brick buildings (not unlike our own) which recently had a radical piece of engineering by an esteemed architect (Cesar Pelli) plopped into its downtown.

I'm not applauding its design, as I think it's a bit too extreme for its context and appears to have poor street interaction, but it just goes to show you that there are American cities even smaller and more architecturally conservative than Orlando that have commissioned extravagant civic structures.

Nice looking arena. It was opened a month ago, 565,000 square feet, seats just under 20,000 and was built for $196 million. Yep, Ours will cost 244% more to build. Is it going to be 244% better? I seriously doubt it. Where does all this money go???

[Jaybee]

Well, all that I can say is that there are different trends in arena designs, and you can see by the attachment I created, there's enough variety going around. Made this a few years ago, prior to the Tulsa one in question being completed (amongst others), but, I thought Tulsa was one of the more exciting "Iconic" designs (that's why it's first). However, I don't think that the interaction of the design with the urban fabric truly adds to the urban experience of downtown Tulsa. Just look at the empty streets, small sidewalks, parking lots on the edge, and landscaping for landscaping sake is in the design shown in facility man's photograph.

Radiostatic is on to something; these elements can be more important to the design than the "Wow" factor of the architecture in order for a project to be successful. Just my two cents, so don't flame me.

arena.pdf

Edited October 2, 2008 by Jaybee

[prahaboheme]

Nice building, yes, but look at its surroundings. Look at how very unfriendly this area is for the pedestrian. Does this building do anything to satisfy that need? No--in fact, the arena itself has non-urban elements, the grassy patches are particularly bad.

[codypet]

Nice building, yes, but look at its surroundings. Look at how very unfriendly this area is for the pedestrian. Does this building do anything to satisfy that need? No--in fact, the arena itself has non-urban elements, the grassy patches are particularly bad.

From the looks of it. It appears Tulsa's arena is in an industrial area, as if the city was trying to create more commercial infill between the downtown and the industrial portions of the city. That being said I was thinking the other day about the current Amway Arena. Other than the ammenities the new stadiums had, is it really that bad? I mean granted it isolates itself away from the rest of downtown, but wouldn't having buildings adjacent to the arena as opposed to surface parking merge the arena better with downtown? The reason I ask this is a concern for the lack of renderings on the South St. and Division Ave. side of the new arena I fear rather than bringing people into Paramore, this arena will act as a wall and the only revitalized portion of Paramore will on Church from Division Ave. East. South St. gets a garage across the Arena, and there is one already on Church, not to mention the Suntrust Garage a block away.

[cwetteland]

Tulsa and cities like it can do that because they are geographically isolated from other major urban centers. Orlando is a hop skip and a jump from the Miami area and even closer to Tampa Bay and Jacksonville. Okay maybe Jacksonville isn't a MAJOR urban center, but you know what I mean. Tulsa and OKC can get neat things done because when it comes to civilization out there, they are IT. Period. Orlando is not in that situation.

... uh ... what?

Tulsa and OKC are IT and so they can build neat things. Orlando is not IT and so we cannot build neat things.

... uh ... what?

Do our designers go to Miami and and Tampa ask permission? Do Miami and Tampa have some undocumented veto power over what Orlando builds? Is there some rule I just don't know that says you have to be surrounded by tumbleweed to build interesting architecture?

[JFW657]

Nice looking arena. It was opened a month ago, 565,000 square feet, seats just under 20,000 and was built for $196 million. Yep, Ours will cost 244% more to build. Is it going to be 244% better? I seriously doubt it. Where does all this money go???

All you're seeing is the outside. The question is what has it got on the inside?

From wht I understand, our arena is going to have restaurants & lounges with dining areas overlooking the court so patrons can dine & watch the game at the same time. It's also going to have an expanded skybox area as well as more retail areas & who knows what all else. I'm pretty sure it will have a floor that can be converted to a skating rink too. Does Tulsa's building have all those amenities within?

Maybe that's where the cost difference lies.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing that particular design in Orlando, though I think it borders on being a little too stange looking. But I still don't think downtown Orlando is mature enough for something like that. Tusla is a more mature city than Orlando. We're still in our pre-teens or early adolescence as a city.

[JFW657]

... uh ... what?

Tulsa and OKC are IT and so they can build neat things. Orlando is not IT and so we cannot build neat things.

... uh ... what?

Do our designers go to Miami and and Tampa ask permission? Do Miami and Tampa have some undocumented veto power over what Orlando builds? Is there some rule I just don't know that says you have to be surrounded by tumbleweed to build interesting architecture?

I think what he meant was that cities that are the only major urban center in a large geographical region (aka "hub cities")tend to attract more & better things like say.... top flight architecture, because they are the hub of the business world for a long long distance & for a lots & lots of people & the various industries they work in.

Orlando is the smallest child of a large, close proximity family of fun-in-the-sun tourist style siblings (with Jacksonville being the blue collar working brother) & so the really cool stuff tends to wind up in places like Miami & even Tampa who has better architecture than we do.

Orlando is just not taken as seriously yet as a major corporate center so, we don't get the kinds of "gee-whiz" buildings that corporate money & power attract.

Edited October 1, 2008 by JFW657

[radiostatic102]

JFW657 said exactly what I meant to say in my garbled early-morning pre-caffeine post. I'm just an amateur with this stuff so BLAH it will come out sounding that way. Especially if I'm half-awake. I make no excuse for it.

And Orlando is an awesome place. Although I do disagree w/ Sunshine, IMO Orlando does take a second seat to Miami and to a lesser extent Tampa when it comes to the IT factor. But regardless, these venues will help catapult it ahead very nicely. I love the Orlando metro. I don't ever plan on leaving it. I found Sanford and I am in luurrrv with it. And once these venues get opened, man oh man...

Thanks JFW. I really owe you one.

[cwetteland]

It still doesn't make since to me. A $480,000,000 Center is a $480,000,000 Center, no matter where you build it. We pay our architects as much as they pay their architects. Nobody's saying, "hey you better dull down your design, by golly, this ain't Miami?" Nobody is saying, "Tampa is too close, you better think dull." It's architects that design the buildings and I'm not so convinced that our EC is such a bad design.

As Orlando grows to become more metropolitan, then things that have the "Orlando look" will be deemed to be more metropolitan (in a very Orlando way). I think it flows that way not from the building up to the city. These facilities are ours not New Jersey's or New York's or Miami's or Tampa's and accordingly shouldn't be trying to copy their look. That's what made that facility in Tulsa look so out of place. Truly great cities have their own look and feel. I think the EC will have an Orlando look and feel. w00t w00t

Same goes for the OPAC.

Edited October 1, 2008 by cwetteland

[JRS1]

^^

that looks like the cousin to the Miami PAC; beautiful bldg.

wow.

wow. again on the price differential compared to the Events Center.

the only way to incorporate an arena into the surrounding is to either have it in a park area, or connect it to a complex (GWCC & Phillips); otherwise, see Chicago Stadium/ UAA.

still, way to go Tulsa. is that for the Supersonics, or is that Ok. City?

[bic]

is that for the Supersonics, or is that Ok. City?

The Sonics are now the Oklahoma City Thunder.

[Jaybee]

Cloudship, I made the picture out of a bunch of pictures... again, this was a few years back before the "bird's nest" waz constructed.

Edited October 2, 2008 by Jaybee

[JFW657]

It still doesn't make since to me. A $480,000,000 Center is a $480,000,000 Center, no matter where you build it. We pay our architects as much as they pay their architects. Nobody's saying, "hey you better dull down your design, by golly, this ain't Miami?" Nobody is saying, "Tampa is too close, you better think dull." It's architects that design the buildings and I'm not so convinced that our EC is such a bad design.

I think a lot of it has to do with clout & connections. If your city is the big kahuna for a large geographic region, the leaders of that city will likely have closer ties to state & federal govt. officials as well as the heads of the large corporations who call the city home.

And I'm not so sure about the "we pay our architects as much as they pay their architects" notion either.

When you have a large amount power & money & influence behind a project, I believe you might tend to be able to hire architects that may be out of the price range of smaller cities like Orlando. The Frank Gehry's of the world don't come cheap, & anything that gets spent on design lessens the amount left for construction.

In the case of these larger, more economically relevant corporate center, hub cities where these powerful interests are at work behind the scenes, I'm guessing that extra design money sort of just magically appears out of nowhere & then gets hidden in other costs.

[FLClarkKent]

My folks live in Tulsa, and the BOK Center gets an A+ in the design department. When it comes to street interaction, pedestrian friendliness, true urbanity, etc. -- C+, at best.

I've read a lot of posts comparing costs...I have to assume the cost of the Orlando Events Center and the BOK Center take into account the cost of land. Let me tell ya, you can get a lot more land for the buck in Oklahoma than you can in Central Florida. I would imagine the differences in property values have a major impact in the cost disparities between these two centers.

[jack]

Our arena is in the $300's just for the building. Another large chunk is for land and infrastructure. our arena is almost twice as big as the current arena. Maybe that is where the difference is. Our new arena is close to 750,000 square feet total. The current one is less then 400,000.

[bic]

Probably the biggest reason why our arena will cost so much relative to others is that it will be LEED-certified, which is quite costly. Because I'm lazy, I'll just quote Wikipedia on this:

Green buildings cost more both to design and to construct when compared to conventional buildings. The cost of designing a LEED certified building is higher for several reasons. One reason is that sustainable construction principles may not be well understood by the design professionals undertaking the project. This could require time to be spent on research. Some of the finer points of LEED certification (especially those which demand a higher-than-orthodox standard of service from the construction team) could possibly lead to misunderstandings between the design team, construction team, and client, which could result in delays. Also, there may be a lack of abundant availability of manufactured building components which meet LEED standards. Pursuing LEED certification for a project is an added cost in itself as well. This added cost comes in the form of USGBC correspondence, LEED design-aide consultants, and the hiring of the required Commissioning Authority (CxA) (all of which would not necessarily be included in an environmentally responsible project unless it were also seeking LEED certification).

Often times when LEED certification is pursued, the initial construction cost of the project will be higher than the current industry standard. However, these high initial costs can be effectively mitigated by the savings incurred over time due to the lower-than-industry-standard operational costs which are typical of a LEED certified building. Additionally, economic payback may come in the form of employee productivity gains incurred as a result of working in a healthier environment. Studies have suggested that an initial up front investment of 2% extra will yield over ten times the initial investment over the life cycle of the building.

[Magicfan95]

That and out arena will be 800,000 sq (not 595,000 sq like the Bok Center).

I know some are displeased by the outside of the arena. But they went ALL OUT on the interior. It will be the most state of the art and pleasing facility in indoor professional sports.

There are a lot more to these facilities than the exterior.

[bic]

October 2, 2008. 12:45pm.

The footprint of the superstructure is shaping up:

[JFW657]

I know some are displeased by the outside of the arena. But they went ALL OUT on the interior. It will be the most state of the art and pleasing facility in indoor professional sports.

There are a lot more to these facilities than the exterior.

True, but you don't see the interior driving by on I-4.

[cwetteland]

True, but you don't see the interior driving by on I-4.

They aren't building it for the people on I-4. They can look at the billboards.

[JFW657]

They aren't building it for the people on I-4. They can look at the billboards.

They're not???????????????????? I'm shocked to learn that.

Here I thought they were building it for everyone, both the people who attend events there & the people who just drive by & look at it.

So exactly who ARE they building it for, anyway?

[codypet]

They're not???????????????????? I'm shocked to learn that.

Here I thought they were building it for everyone, both the people who attend events there & the people who just drive by & look at it.

So exactly who ARE they building it for, anyway?

You could have fooled me! I thought they were building it for the people of Paramore! That's who they said it would benefit.

[UPSDAN]

Any word on if they are keeping the tower or not? You'd think it would not look good for the Magic if they backed out of it after bragging to everyone about a 120ft tower. I don't think anyone wants it to look like a K-mart from the outside for the amount of money being thrown at it....

[jack]

From what I saw, it is still there. The renderings were scanned and were not very good but it does not look as good as it did before.

[solaricfission]

From what I saw, it is still there. The renderings were scanned and were not very good but it does not look as good as it did before.

Spire Anyone?