Thats not the Parade of Champions as I remember it from 1994 to 2000. This looks like a practice or something. Consolations ended about 3:30 and lots of folks left to get a break, something to eat outside--in the car or go to a restaurant. About 5-5:30 or so the crowd started back in, plus newcomers who attended the finals only. To me, as I remember, the place was packed to the rafters by then. Another clue, the video shows 9 mats. After the consolation 6 mats were removed and reconfigued into a straight line--leaving only one mat per class for just the finals.

Added. The Parade alway entered on the 6A and 5A end of the arena as the video shows. At the 4A end was the tournament admin/computer area on a raised platform--which may have been moved for the winners stand. Also, the wrestlers did not march in over the mats, the marched in on what I call north of the line of mats--maybe better said as to the left of the 4A side, aren main entrance.

All I need to know is this, it was the Taj Mahal of refurbishments, and it was a government estimate (Sedgwick County at that).
I don't beleive they were required to spend any monies on ADA until such time as the existing building was put under reconstruction. All ADA codes would have had to be complied with, following. The Coliseum could be operating today as a stand alone venue, as is, if there wasn't an Intrust.
I hope everyone will come to realize just how great of a facility that place was, particularly for our sport.

I believe that is referred to as the "Parade of Athletes"? That is at the very beginning of day One. The "Parade of Champions" is right before the finals and is as you describe.

I always thought there was a seating split-seats below the entrance tunnels, seats above the entrance tunnels.

Agree about the Parade of Athletes--had forgot that. Also, in the video there is lots of outside light comming through the entrance tunnels--as if the video was shot in the AM. It would have been a lot darker outside in late Feb by the time of the Parade of Champions.

Excellent point. Typical when KSHSAA screws up "we had no idea!!"

Must have been one of those Let's make a Deal game show contracts, where you pick the curtain that your rent amount and terms are behind.........

I think you lose ALL of the lower level seating when you have two wide mats, but you might be able to do 2 wide mats if you only pull out one side of the lower bleachers. Hartman that is. Great facility, I just don't think it would be big enough for 2 classes. One class for sure. Who knows, maybe 5a or 6a would enjoy having a gym all to themselves, like 4a seems to right now. I would still prefer the all inclusive tourney.

And Sporto, I agree on the bill of goods we were sold on the reasons for voting for the arena. I also specifically remember them telling us it would seat something like 18,000, so we could host NCAA tourneys(like I care), but what is the seating, 15,000?

Absolutely it is a ridiculously high estimate. Don't tell me that the whole place would have to be redone, only the handicap accessibility issue would have had to be addressed.

But that is rubbing salt in an old wound of mine. By the way, can you tell I voted against the arena? Wait until the honeymoon is over and it isn't making money anymore.

Lucas, Dodge City did not win Garden did also 5A winner was Goddard and the video you showed was on friday morning and was opening ceremony of state qualifiers not parade of champions. If you listen you here them anounce state qualifiers.

Government Estimate? I can point to 6 LOCAL architectural, engineering and construction firms that worked on the estimates....not once but twice.

As for the "Taj Mahal", what people did not understand about BBA was the extent to which the facility was non-compliant. When you touch a non-compliant structure, by law EVERYTHING has to be corrected to CURRENT codes. Unless you are talking about a historically significant structure there is no wiggle room on that. A 30 year old structure, ANY 30 year old structure was built to different codes and will be by its very nature non-compliant in many reasons. In the case of BBA that meant renovations starting at the parking lot with the approaches to the building and continued well through out the structure.

You also say "Just fix the bathrooms", but as an example of extensive the rennnovations would have been, understand that the space underneath the existing bowl structure was inadequate for compliant bathrooms and there would have to be new facilities constructed OUTSIDE the concourse requiring that the architectural shell be expanded. Factor in that the concourse on BBA is on the "second floor" and in many places you were now extending structure to support the new restroom facilities some 30+ feet.

Please don't think that I am trying to say that you are "stupid" or anything, but many people simply don't understand what that rennovation would have taken. It was a HUGE project.



Nope, the ADA settlement had a strict compliancy date at which time there needed to be a plan to either rennovate, replace or close the structure.



No one is arguing that, at least not me.

What I am saying though is that when given the choice of spending $49m (taking out the $6m for the pavilion renovations that happened afterall) to rennovate that facility or construct a new one, I became (I was not originally) a supporter of replacement.

I am not saying that I support completely the new arena either, I have issues with several things about it. But, it is hard to argue with the success of the arena:

INTRUST BANK ARENA RANKS IN TOP 50 WORLD TICKET SALES
http://www.intrustbankarena.com/news.asp?id=10&pid=285&task=display&pcatid=

Just some additional context,

Chuck

I believe the estimates done by the private entities who attempted to buy/lease BBA were half, at best, of what the county's estimates were. Like any government estimate, you first throw in the gold standard and later reduce back to tin foil.
I won't argue the ADA requirements but I have never seen a federal requirement yet that couldn't be circumvented, and that would include ADA. Yes it would be messy, but it could be done, even with the settlement agreement. Does that mean they should have done so, probably not, the building needed the facelift anyway.
I too was/am a supporter of the new arena, even though I didn't have a vote. BUT, I believed then, and continue to believe there was room in the county for both facilities, for different purposes. That doesn't mean I am not aware of all of the shennanigans that went along, or go along, with passing the bond issue to build Intrust. That includes greatly inflating the reconstruction costs of BBA.

And there is your error. I can conclude from that statement that you have never sat in on a code compliancy review on a design project....especially around the ADA. Not only is there no way to circumvent the ADA, you will find interpretations of a code official well beyond the "letter of the law".

I had a code official once try to make me add ramps the bottom of the 6" sills on french doors that opened from private offices onto a courtyard. That discussion consumed 2 weeks of my life and we had to eventually change the design because he would not budge.

So, if you think that after the county lost an ADA lawsuit there would be sympathetic code officials that would give you wiggle room you are mistaken.



You do realize that the new arena WAS NOT funded through a bond election, but a sunset clause 1 cent county sales tax?

But, you have drawn a conclusion and it is obvious that won't change......no worries.

Chuck

http://www.2-tickets.com/venues/KansasColiseumEnd_all.GIF

Based off where the Camera was sitting 4a coverd from 119 all the way around to 120. The Whole North End was 4a Abilene Filled all of 119 and 117. I might be wrong on this but I think Goodland filled all of 113 Clay Center had a very large Crowd as well. Regardless With the Short rows on the South end 4a fans filled half the Kansas Coliseum.

Another interesting read as it relates to anything related to government........

Obama's Left-Handed Hammer
Editorial, Washington Examiner, 4-14:





Barely 15 percent of all construction-industry workers in the United States are union members, while the remaining 85 percent are nonunion, according to the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. So why has President Obama signed Executive Order 13502 directing federal agencies taking bids for government construction projects to accept only those from contractors who agree in advance to a project labor agreement that requires a union work force? Obama's new order applies to all federal construction projects with price tags of $25 million or more, and it means all such contracts will only be awarded to companies with unionized work forces.



By eliminating the vast majority of potential bidders on federal construction projects, Obama guarantees two things. First, the projects will cost taxpayers more because union labor is always more expensive. And with mandated PLAs, the cost premium for union contractors will be even greater because fewer bidders always means less competition and higher prices. Second, by guaranteeing unions a bigger stream of federal contracts, Obama is making sure that Big Labor, already among the Democrats' biggest sources of campaign cash, will have even more money to hand out for the 2010 and 2012 elections. You scratch our back with taxpayers dollars gleaned through PLA-based federal construction jobs, and we'll scratch your back with campaign contributions. That's the way it works in Obama's business-as-usual Washington. It's also known in some quarters as "the Chicago Way."



"The Obama administration's policy is a slap in the face to the vast majority of construction workers who have chosen not to unionize," said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation."Qualified nonunion contractors whose workers have opted against unionization will be locked out from large-scale construction projects. The true purpose of so-called project labor agreements is simple: To impose unwanted union boss control on workers from the top down."



Another factor helps explain Obama's willingness to sign an executive order that will put millions more tax dollars in union coffers. Mix points out that unions under PLAs typically exact agreements that include requiring contractors to make payments to union pension funds. This is an increasingly urgent issue, as the Washington Examiner's Mark Hemingway has recently detailed in these pages. According to Labor Department filings, the average union pension has only enough money on hand to cover 62 percent of the benefits it has promised to union members. Pension plans with 80 percent funding are considered "endangered" by federal auditors, while those with less than 65 percent funding are put on the "critical" list. With this latest executive order, it's clear that Obama intends to give unions on the critical list a massive dose of federal tax dollars to cure what ails them.

And now back to the original topic of this thread.....

http://blogs.varsitykansas.com/blog/2010...-be/#more-10225

From the Hartman Arena website:

"The building is subterranean (the seating bowl is located underground), which helps keep costs down for heating and cooling, and runs on electricity from a 150' tall wind turbine when there are no events! Recycled materials were used for the steel, insulation, and plastics in the building. New, innovative recycling ideas are in place inside the arena and carpoolers are rewarded with free parking at events."

I like this idea.

This building was built with taxpayers money, then turned over to a private corporation to operate. They make money without the risk of having to fund the building itself. Now, they refuse to take a pay cut, even though it would benefit the city and the people (who own and work in the businesses) who actually paid for the building. The money lost to the city will greatly exceed the difference between what the company charges and what we can afford to pay and still break even. If the city or county ran the building with its own employee's they could work things out like this. So much for public expenditures and private profit. Corporate welfare.

4,5,6A should be put back together, people and familys and wreslters are missing so many of the matches people look forward to and it makes it that much more exciting for the wreslters

But at least with a private company running it, we don't have to hear about it losing money every year.