Jump to content

XL Center Renovation/Replacement Plans


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 237
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Amen to that brother. Why a market the size of ours doesn't justify getting a new arena every 40 years or so is a mystery to me. It's served us well for a pretty long time and now it's time to get a n

Posted Images

Hartford needs a arena. The XL Center is fine for now, but I hear the innards of the building are starting to really show their age. There will be a point where the building will need to be replaced, and yes government should invest in it.

Mikel I don't always or maybe often agree with you, but even if the NHL never returns you are right a new building is necessary to keep what he have, womens big east, shot at mens ncaa regionals, etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

No arena, no lady gaga.

I look at stadiums the same way I look at big screen HDTV. No one needs one . They are a low priority for the survival of a family. Yet, almost everyone gets one.

Why? Because they improve the quality of life of the people that have them. They provide entertainment and joy. They have the ability to bring a family or community together in through shared experience. They nourish the emotional needs of human beings.

Arenas contribute something to society that can be gotten no other way. And recently, there are studies that prove the economic benefits as well as the marketing benefits to a metro area are significant.

So a new arena would improve the quality of life for every person and business in the community. People who don't understand this are very short-sighted.

Edited by beerbeer
Link to post
Share on other sites

the arena subject is just about the most powerful one out there. for Hartford, when a new arena is built, no matter the location, it will be the game changer. good or bad. it will make more of a difference than the whole adrians landing project.

The NoDo thread kind of fired this up again, but really that thread shows how much we all know this could change the shape and feel of the city.

remove the arena like New Haven did and well, we have a huge void in our cities fabric. and I think well we would be screwed, while NH has the

Re-build an arena in the same spot but newer bigger better and with a pro team or even just more regional/national events(ncaa regionals/gymnastics championships) and with pedestrian access between Pratt and Allyn Street. downtown all of a sudden would have some panache, and some connectivity, some flow and a reason to actually follow that flow(between Pratt and Allyn)

but thats just one option.

The NoDO possibilities are also transformative.

using location 1 over a new I-84/rail tunnel, could connect asylum hill to downtown a little to the north of where the possible I-84 highway plaza decking near the park will. its extremely connective in a great way. this could put the arena a close walk to the coming train system, it would be very close to the entertainment district that is allyn and union Place. i think that between commuter rail highway decking and new arena, the surface lots on Allyn would end up getting developed pretty quickly.

location 3 would surely lead to a completely transformed NoDo area with serious development pressure put on 1000 main street and way more life on Main Street. really to be fair, a hot dog stand would transform NoDo, so an Arena with a little residential near by and some entertainment venues. Rock ON! something nice at 1000 main, a total bonus. the footprint of downtown would expand big time to the North. and with the potential highway re alignment and associated 14 acre western expansion of downtown along the park towards aetna, hartford could really be something different.

the funny thing is how much of a draw the arena could be, and as an anchor for lots of other development.

I dont think it could work in an isolated location, but if in location 1 3 or 5 it could really add to what we have or what we may have in every way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't they raise the arena a bit? How about making it above a street, like having a small portion of Church St or Main St go through a tunnel, the tunnel being the arena above the street...

most arenas are dug into the ground pretty deep. suppose anythings possible,but generally, id think we would b fine by moving it just enough to open pratt/allyn and lose church

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think MSG is above ground. If they can build the Eisenhower Tunnel a mile through the Continental Divide, I'd imagine they can make a street through a raised arena. I suppose the problem then is the cost, though it would definitely make entrances to whatever garage would inevitably be attached convenient...

Link to post
Share on other sites

the funny thing is how much of a draw the arena could be, and as an anchor for lots of other development.

I dont think it could work in an isolated location, but if in location 1 3 or 5 it could really add to what we have or what we may have in every way.

I agree with those locations, but would add site 2 (directly north of current site) to the list. I think it is comparable to site 3 (near Crowne Plaza) in many ways with a slight advantage in being a little closer to Union Station.

I don't know why site 4 was even considered. That would have knocked out Allyn and High streets.

I think MSG is above ground.

I don't think MSG spans the streets. It is built over the rail lines leading to and from Penn Station.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with those locations, but would add site 2 (directly north of current site) to the list. I think it is comparable to site 3 (near Crowne Plaza) in many ways with a slight advantage in being a little closer to Union Station.

the reason I am "anti" site 2 is because it destroys that whole triangle of buildings there. and while they currently may not be is perfect shape and used to highest possible use, they are nice buildings that would end up being the center of a nice little area just north of any arena built at site 3.

also, with the destruction of those buildings, and the development of site 2 as an arena, we would be creating a massive area of sterility. (look at the drawings in the PDF) the new public safety center across the street from an arena.... these are both huge buildings that would both be a little on the bland side, especially on the High Street side.

I think site 3 would much more lead to adding buildings to the little triangle to the N and W and over by the public safety center as well as 1000 main and around butt ugly.

site 2 would also not neccessarily put any pressure on the surrounding blocks because there would not bu much else around it to develop. I think church street garage would still need re-development and that area and maybe some of the empty parking lots to the east, but the parking would also all of a sudden become much more profitable, so maybe it wouldnt develop.

i dunno.

I guess I have just committed myself mentally to focusing on the park as the central point to develop around.

IF we get the I-84 thing going and it is at least on the horizon, I see filling in the holes along the park and in Allyn Street + Asylum street etc as the key to our vibrancy. An arena in the current location would help to continue to put life closer to what I see as our atributes, and to me thats better than forcing development to the parking fields north of downtown. because lets fact it. the land around the park is more attractive than the land N of 84.

its also smart to fill in the holes closer to the train station.

mind you we just need a few billion worth of eager developers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Important question.... how do Segarra and Malloy stand on the whole arena situation?? If both aren't on board I don't see it happening (assuming Segarra runs and gets re-elected)

Pedro IS going to run, he just announced.

his only public comment on the arena was that if something were proposed he would have to look at it and that Hartford had more pressing issues right now.... or something like that.

I am thinking he would be supportive because usually, people in his position if they are against something get vocal on it right away and stand on that conviction, while if they support something, they are often quiet so as not to have to commit to anything untill such time as it is politically prudent to vocalize support.

no clue on Malloy

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

On the flip-side, here's a cautionary tale about a city with a brand-new stadium (but no pro team yet).

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6743732/hard-times-paris-plains

Point taken but this is not the worst case scenario for Hartford unless UConn is struck by a meteor. Our worst case scenario is Louisville where U of L basketball is the pride of the town and the most profitable college basketball program in the country. Also I've read reports that KC's Arena, while without a pro or major college tenent is economically viable. The bottom line for Hartford though is that a new arena downtown would be broadcast nationally and beyond on a nearly weekly basis during the college basketball season and having a nice one would be better exposure for Hartford then what we currently have. That much is for certain and without it we stand no chance of getting the NHL back or luring the NBA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sprint Center in Kansas City is a money maker.

" The Sprint Center celebrated its third anniversary by paying $2.1 million to Kansas City as part of a profit-sharing agreement, and by being ranked the second-busiest entertainment arena in the country by a trade publication.The downtown venue opened in October 2007, and though it hasn’t landed a major professional sports franchise, it has exceeded its goals when it comes to financial performance, attendance from concerts and other events. Acting city manager Troy Schulte said the city had budgeted receiving $1.8 million from the Sprint Center profit-sharing agreement,…"

If the Sprint Center is an example of the downside, there is no downside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I struggle to see a downside either.

I mean in the world of sports arenas, it really just takes 1 major tenant, and then the place needs to be the main arena for the area, so it gets a bunch of concerts and monster stucks and maybe a convention thing or two.

Hartford, Amazingly has 2 major tenants with UConn, because our Womens team draws nearly as well as the Mens.

thats a great benefit. Hartford is a major concert city, and manages to get every random entertainment event from Cirque to Gymnastics to Desmond Tutu.

If we could get any pro team, a new arena would be immediately viable, and I bet with just college and minor league hockey, it would be pretty damn close.

How could a new arena not draw more people? I have hear tons of people say thing like "I like hockey, but I wont go to that dump to watch a game" and I heard it with UCONN instead of hockey, and I heard it as an argument against going to Cirq as well once.

so I am guessing a new Arena would at least open the possibility for more attendees to events...

whatever we all know prettymuch everyone here is supportive of a new arena :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Went to Yankee Stadium on Saturday. Have not been to a new facility in decades. The facilities being built are an entertainment attraction on their own. An old venue does not work unless the fan base far exceeds capacity and a new building is not an option. If a new one is an option, you always go that way. Old venues remain only because no one will put up the money for a new one. A new one downtown is a must. when the mall was built 30 years ago, it was a draw. that time is gone. It's the 21st century..

Edited by nor'easter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

these reports just show the deamnd for the market, and how well the location is being managed by AEG.

In reality its doing OK, it could be doing MUCH BETTER!!!!!!

If we had a better facility it would be doing much better and if on top of that we could draw a Pro team in the NBA or NHL it would jump up the list dramatically.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Good to see something new, no matter how pie-in-the-sky.

http://www.courant.com/sports/hockey/hc-xl-center-renderings-gallery,0,386853.photogallery

http://www.courant.com/sports/hockey/hc-whale-xl-center-1116-20111115,0,3405456.story

8:45 a.m. EST, November 15, 2011

Howard Baldwin unveiled his vision for the XL Center at the Metro Hartford Alliance breakfast Tuesday morning at the Bushnell, which includes the return of the NHL to Hartford by 2017, according to Rick Green via Twitter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://blogs.courant...-in-five-y.html

http://www.courant.c...0,3405456.story

Howard Baldwin is now saying that he is trying to move forward with a renovation plan and has unveiled the specifics this morning. It looks like we are headed for a renovation instead of a new building but it does look to be fairly extensive and ambitious based on the renderings that have been released. His plan now includes the specific goal of having the NHL return by 2017. If he is saying he can have the Whalers back in 5 years he must be having some pretty good conversations with the NHL. UConn is on board with the renovation plan and Aetna is stepping up to the plate to provide some of the funding. All and all, this is looking kinda promising. Another interesting aspect is that Trumbull St. will be shut to traffic at least occasionally and redone in brick to match Pratt St., a nice touch if it happens. Larry G who owns Hartford 21 and controls the XL Center until 2013 doesn't seem to be on board but the XL Center reverts to city control in 2013 and the renovation would start once the city regains control and take a year to complete. If Malloy is supportive of this, it could end up being a pretty major thing.

244310160-15055454.jpg

242506840-15055427.jpg

246704760-15055440.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't really know how they will add more luxury boxes, if they do then they would have lower capacity. capacity for hockey is only 15,000. any lower capacity then 16,000 the nhl is not going to put an nhl team in that arena. the drawings look cool but i still think a new arena is needed. the building is 40 years old and a renovation would be just a bandaid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.