East Hartford’s Rentschler Field needs $63 million upgrade, new study says. ‘like walking into a time capsule’

[husky8273]

Should CT spend hundreds of millions for an on campus stadium before or after the XL Center is replaced?

 

[LoyalFanCT]

Should CT spend hundreds of millions for an on campus stadium before or after the XL Center is replaced?

Maybe a private company should take over the XL Center and fix it up.

 

[pepband99]

1) you guys have waaaay too inflated senses of college stadiums. Most are dumps, some are outright embarrassing. The Rent is fine.
2) Perhaps if CRDA hadn't spent so much money on El Al levels of security, they might have been able to keep up with maintenance.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Well, other than not having a spare quarter of a billion dollars +/- just lying around.

That’s a brilliant take.

Do you have any idea how lame an on campus stadium would be with anything less than $200M?

Of course you don’t. Because if you did you wouldn’t make such a stupid comment.

When someone can show that the state has the appetite to spend something like that on an on campus stadium and spend what it takes to maintain it and keep it up to date then let me know.

$200m-$250m for an on campus stadium??? Lol. I want some of what you are drinking.

UConn just spent $70m for a 2500 sest hockey arena.

A 40k seat stadium similar in size and amenities to the Rent would be at least $400m, probably closer to $500m.

And that wouldn't include other state funding for infrastructure needed for area roads.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Alright you dum dums who are against this; what should we do? Wait 20 more years so that it costs $120M?

The HCC/XL Center conundrum.

Each year the facility depreciates more, cost of labor and cost of material go up.

 

[BPT2Storrs]

I honestly have no idea on how to proceed. Who’s to say that the $63M doesn’t balloon into a larger dollar amount? Has everything been accounted for in the study or is there a chance that in a couple of years additional money is needed for other improvements?

If you keep the Rent it’s just going to become a money pit. If you build new, it’s likely three quarters of a billion by the time everything is done (design, permitting, engineering, construction, soft costs, and don’t forget infrastructure).

In my mind it’s not feasible to build new now, although my dream is to see an on campus stadium. That being said, I don’t want the Rent to turn into the XL and every other year a multimillion dollar renovation is needed.

At the end of the day, we need more success on the field which in turn should generate more revenue. Might be an easier to sell to construct a new stadium at that point.

 

[ZooCougar]

The HCC/XL Center conundrum.

Each year the facility depreciates more, cost of labor and cost of material go up.

Can you imagine the cost if we built something like that on campus?

 

[Kolumbo]

Not attacking anyone here but love the football field where it is. Further explanation below.


What make's it a dump? The grounds and stadium are clean as are the rest rooms. What makes a sporting location that one only spends a half a day such an eyesore???

No attack @Kolumbo but it is not always distance. First one has to find a place on campus to locate a stadium. Then find acreage for parking. Again a state road study to possibly get the amount of cars and parking needed.

Not sure if those who have not been to the campus lately realize just what a football game traffic would be. Campus access roads are still 1960's and upgrades on campus for those lost, will be encountering roundabouts at each turn they are lost at.

While the new baseball, softball and soccer facilities are absolutely wonderful, parking is still a good walk from the venue.
I attend sporting games on campus but glad football is where it is. Just my opinion.

It's a fair criticism but we seem to find excuses while just about every other college finds a way. There is plenty of land for the stadium. Parking and travel is what it is, but it's 6 saturdays a year. Perhaps a program struggling this badly and having an off-campus stadium isn't the secret recipe for success which other programs are missing.

 

[Kolumbo]

I honestly have no idea on how to proceed. Who’s to say that the $63M doesn’t balloon into a larger dollar amount? Has everything been accounted for in the study or is there a chance that in a couple of years additional money is needed for other improvements?

If you keep the Rent it’s just going to become a money pit. If you build new, it’s likely three quarters of a billion by the time everything is done (design, permitting, engineering, construction, soft costs, and don’t forget infrastructure).

In my mind it’s not feasible to build new now, although my dream is to see an on campus stadium. That being said, I don’t want the Rent to turn into the XL and every other year a multimillion dollar renovation is needed.

At the end of the day, we need more success on the field which in turn should generate more revenue. Might be an easier to sell to construct a new stadium at that point.

I agree. It's a very difficult choice. The current cheapest route is probably to stay at Renschler which has the wide open tailgating. The Rent is a basic mostly concrete structure so it seems maintenance should be manageable without at $63 million price tag ONLY 20 YEARS IN! It's not like these old historic on-campus stadiums that other programs keep renovating. It also hosts other soccer and lacrosse events and concerts so it does need to be maintained. I'm 98% certain that's the most feasible route right now. A P5 conference invite might slightly change the options.

 

[Patman]

I agree. It's a very difficult choice. The current cheapest route is probably to stay at Renschler which has the wide open tailgating. The Rent is a basic mostly concrete structure so it seems maintenance should be manageable without at $63 million price tag ONLY 20 YEARS IN! It's not like these old historic on-campus stadiums that other programs keep renovating. It also hosts other soccer and lacrosse events and concerts so it does need to be maintained. I'm 98% certain that's the most feasible route right now. A P5 conference invite might slightly change the options.

this is the key part, this is about the future of a venue this size in Connecticut. Do you want to keep hosting important events or not for the people of central connecticut?

 

[CL82]

Have any of the people who want an on-campus football stadium ever driven into and out of Storrs on 195/44 in traffic? There's literally 2 one lane roads into campus. And football would be 2.5x the capacity of Gampel? Heh, okay.

Yes. I’ve also driven in and out of Rutgers and Michie stadium after a game. There are ways to manage traffic. The most obvious of which is tailgating to feather the times when people come in and leave. Dedicating both lanes to exiting traffic is a method they use as well. The vast majority of football stadiums don’t have an exit and entrance ramp onto a major highway. They all manage getting people in and out before and after games. We could as well.

 

[CL82]

And that wouldn't include other state funding for infrastructure needed for area roads

I don’t think we need to build a super highway to Storrs for six events a year. Intelligent traffic management and would handle the issue.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I don’t think we need to build a super highway to Storrs for six events a year. Intelligent traffic management and would handle the issue.

Not talking about an interstate or mega highway.

But simple things like four laning the road for stretches, doubling lanes at intersections, making roads feasible for one direction traffic, some basic drainage and lighting improvements can all be done but take money.

 

[huskymedic]

$200m-$250m for an on campus stadium??? Lol. I want some of what you are drinking.

UConn just spent $70m for a 2500 sest hockey arena.

A 40k seat stadium similar in size and amenities to the Rent would be at least $400m, probably closer to $500m.

And that wouldn't include other state funding for infrastructure needed for area roads.

I don’t disagree on stadium cost… I threw out a quarter of a billion +/- as a starting point based on something like the new UAB Stadium. It doesn’t include the Northeast/State contract premiums.

Remember… everything is easy to accomplish and cheap on the Internet

 

[uconnric]

how about abandoning the POS and going back to Storrs where UConn athletics actually belongs

How about getting realistic and figuring out it will never be built in Storrs for many reasons, accessability and local opposition being the main ones. Quit whining and move on.

 

[Exit 4]

How about getting realistic and figuring out it will never be built in Storrs for many reasons, accessability and local opposition being the main ones. Quit whining and move on.

Nope- not really going to move on. What are we- of 131 schools how many have off campus stadiums? Three perhaps; Pitt, USF who is now building a stadium because it’s FL who has a growing pop and growing economy, and UCLA?

 

[Kolumbo]

this is the key part, this is about the future of a venue this size in Connecticut. Do you want to keep hosting important events or not for the people of central connecticut?

The flip side argument is that The Rent loses money every year and it doesn't host enough events. The State U pays the State to use stadium. The below article criticizes the stadium and I can't vouch for the veracity of said article, but it's worth considering.

"Although Rentschler hosted more than 150 events last year, those events were decidedly small."

"The building runs deficits most years and this year — for the first time — the state had to directly bail out the stadium with a $200,000 payment."

"Stephanie Reitz, a UConn spokeswoman, said the school since 2014 paid the stadium about $8.1 million, including game rent and the $250,000 subsidy."

Your Money, Your State: The $92 million Field of Nightmares

Hearst Connecticut Media’s series, ‘ Your Money, Your State,’ looks at how state...

www.middletownpress.com

 

[Platt81]

Nope- not really going to move on. What are we- of 131 schools how many have off campus stadiums? Three perhaps; Pitt, USF who is now building a stadium because it’s FL who has a growing pop and growing economy, and UCLA?

23, or 18% play off campus. UConn, Miami, UCLA, UTSA, Hawaii, USF, UNLV, South Alabama, Temple, Washington, NC State, Pitt, SD State, UAB, Baylor, Kent State, Memphis, South Carolina, Georgia State, Navy, Northwestern, San Jose State and Oregon.

 

[Exit 4]

thanks for the list. Off the top, you can’t include any “off campus” stadium that is within 4 to 6 miles- at that range you are close enough. For instance Oregon is merely over the river from the campus, a situation that is pretty much akin to being on campus. I haven’t looked at your others- but Navy jumps out- the campus and school are very close.

Miami is a good one- 21 miles from campus to Hard Rock. We are about 22 miles between the Rent and Storrs

 

[Chin Diesel]

23, or 18% play off campus. UConn, Miami, UCLA, UTSA, Hawaii, USF, UNLV, South Alabama, Temple, Washington, NC State, Pitt, SD State, UAB, Baylor, Kent State, Memphis, South Carolina, Georgia State, Navy, Northwestern, San Jose State and Oregon.

Lol. South Alabama plays on campus. Saying Navy plays off campus is more than a bit disingenuous. The campus sits in the middle of a block of federal land of which the stadium occupies the same land mass. USC is across the street from the campus.

So. to let you have your moment in the sun and be proven oh so right, I propose we build the stadium across the street from the campus so it can still be off campus.

 

[Stinger92860]

Go big or go home. Put a retractable roof on it, enclose the perimeter and use it for basketball.

 

[CL82]

Not talking about an interstate or mega highway.

But simple things like four laning the road for stretches, doubling lanes at intersections, making roads feasible for one direction traffic, some basic drainage and lighting improvements can all be done but take money.

Agree, but none are necessary to manage stadium traffic. To the extent they are desirable they could be done within the states standard infrastructure maintenance and not expressly part of the stadium project.

 

[CL82]

It doesn’t include the Northeast/State contract premiums.

This is a great example of micro think within the state legislature. Generously, The premium labor rate for state of Connecticut products is an attempt to get increased wages to blue-collar workers. Cynically, it’s an attempt to buy labor union support. Regardless, it’s one of those ideas that sound good as long as they aren’t carefully scrutinized. Specifically, the increased labor rate doesn’t take into account the chilling effect it has on projects. The University of Connecticut struggles to get grants research grants in large part because the labor rates are not competitive with other institutions. So, yes, on the jobs that the University does get, people get paid a above market rate, but in turn they get less jobs in total. I would love to see the legislature carve out a temporary exemption for research institutions so that state institutions can be competitive with private institutions. That intern would result in more federal grants, thus more jobs, and would serve as a spark to the research and development initiative that the university is trying to build.

JMHO

 

[CL82]

How about getting realistic and figuring out it will never be built in Storrs for many reasons, accessability and local opposition being the main ones. Quit whining and move on.

For what it’s worth Mansfield approval isn’t necessary for any project that is undertaken entirely on university property.

I don’t disagree with your premise that Rentschler field is footballs home and will be for the for seeable future, I just don’t see the need to add mythology saying that a field “can’t“ be built in Storrs. It can, on existing land already owned by the University, without the need for dramatic infrastructure to the surrounding roads, and without the need for the approval of the PRM.

 

[Exit 4]

This is a great example of micro think within the state legislature. Generously, The premium labor rate for state of Connecticut products is an attempt to get increased wages to blue-collar workers. Cynically, it’s an attempt to buy labor union support. Regardless, it’s one of those ideas that sound good as long as they aren’t carefully scrutinized. Specifically, the increased labor rate doesn’t take into account the chilling effect it has on projects. The University of Connecticut struggles to get grants research grants in large part because the labor rates are not competitive with other institutions. So, yes, on the jobs that the University does get, people get paid a above market rate, but intern they get less jobs in total. I would love to see the legislature carve out a temporary exemption for research institutions so that state institutions can be competitive with private institutions. That intern would result in more federal grants, thus more jobs, and would serve as a spark to the research and development initiative that the university is trying to build.

JMHO

This is how the world has been carved up since FDR. Prevailing wage is a terrific scam…. Not in concept but in the survey data which is an echo chamber.