Villanova announces Pavilion renovation

[XU85]

$60M is a lot of money for a renovation, especially if the future is more games at the Wells Fargo Center.

I agree. The entire cost of the Cintas Center (in 2000) was $46M.

[kayako]

$60M is a lot of money for a renovation, especially if the future is more games at the Wells Fargo Center.

I agree. The entire cost of the Cintas Center (in 2000) was $46M.

That's a bargain, and obviously it's worked out for your program big time.

[Letsgonova]

This is the epitome of putting lipstick on a pig. The Pavilion was undersized when it was built 30 years ago and if they don't add any capacity we will be stuck with another 30-year mistake. If the University can get the township to approve the new dorm complex project, they should have at least tried to get a plan with more seating approved. This is so short-sighted. It would have been a challenge and a lengthy process to fight the township, but this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. When else will the University be in the middle of a massive fundraising campaign with the defending national champions at their disposal? Such a waste.

Well, the $22M lead gift had an expiration date on it that precluded a 5-year legal fight with the Township, and there is no guarantee at all that we would win. The Lancaster Ave project took 3 years of hearings and studies, and it was a huge net BENEFIT to the community. Just imagine the lawsuits over something that would actually add traffic and impact. The University has other battles to fight.

More to the point, the more seating angle is simply not an issue. If the Wells Fargo Center somehow dematerialized, then you'd have an issue. Would we have added 1500 seats in a perfect world? Almost certainly, but it's not that easy to do without removing the roof and changing the whole footprint. What we're doing is costing $60M; what do you think the larger version costs? $120M? Not sure that is feasible, NFC or not.

[NovaGrad12]

This is the epitome of putting lipstick on a pig. The Pavilion was undersized when it was built 30 years ago and if they don't add any capacity we will be stuck with another 30-year mistake. If the University can get the township to approve the new dorm complex project, they should have at least tried to get a plan with more seating approved. This is so short-sighted. It would have been a challenge and a lengthy process to fight the township, but this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. When else will the University be in the middle of a massive fundraising campaign with the defending national champions at their disposal? Such a waste.

Well, the $22M lead gift had an expiration date on it that precluded a 5-year legal fight with the Township, and there is no guarantee at all that we would win. The Lancaster Ave project took 3 years of hearings and studies, and it was a huge net BENEFIT to the community. Just imagine the lawsuits over something that would actually add traffic and impact. The University has other battles to fight.

More to the point, the more seating angle is simply not an issue. If the Wells Fargo Center somehow dematerialized, then you'd have an issue. Would we have added 1500 seats in a perfect world? Almost certainly, but it's not that easy to do without removing the roof and changing the whole footprint. What we're doing is costing $60M; what do you think the larger version costs? $120M? Not sure that is feasible, NFC or not.

I've heard all of these excuses before and I don't buy them. These renovation plans have been in the works for well over 3 years; that is plenty of time to develop a comprehensive plan, present it to Radnor, and see what they have to say. Had this been done in the first place, the rumored lead gift expiration date wouldn't be such an issue. Compromises would have certainly been needed, but when has Radnor actually been able to completely prevent Villanova from doing what it wants? As for cost, if there's a will there's a way; especially with Villanova already surpassing its target for the University's capital campaign. This decision is going to be another 30-year egg on the face moment for the University's administration.

[Dave]

I've heard all of these excuses before and I don't buy them. These renovation plans have been in the works for well over 3 years; that is plenty of time to develop a comprehensive plan, present it to Radnor, and see what they have to say. Had this been done in the first place, the rumored lead gift expiration date wouldn't be such an issue. Compromises would have certainly been needed, but when has Radnor actually been able to completely prevent Villanova from doing what it wants? As for cost, if there's a will there's a way; especially with Villanova already surpassing its target for the University's capital campaign. This decision is going to be another 30-year egg on the face moment for the University's administration.

These renovation plans have been in the works for well over FIVE years and the need for more capacity is in the 9 year old campus Master Plan.

The Big Donor knows this as he was a former Board member.

[Letsgonova]

when has Radnor actually been able to completely prevent Villanova from doing what it wants? As for cost, if there's a will there's a way; especially with Villanova already surpassing its target for the University's capital campaign. This decision is going to be another 30-year egg on the face moment for the University's administration.

Times Radnor has been able to completely prevent Villanova from doing what it wanted:

- New Law School on the conference center property
- New dormitory along Aldwyn Lane
- New health center along Aldwyn Lane
- 4 additional apartment buildings on West Campus (they negotiated a 20(!) year hold on the second set of 4; I guess we got our way?)
- Lights on the soccer and tennis complexes on West Campus

Heck, they just made us build a $6M pedestrian bridge that we didn't want and that no one wants to use.

That's just from memory in the past ~15 years.

As for cost, if there's a will there's a way; especially with Villanova already surpassing its target for the University's capital campaign.

That's easy to say on the money front, but we don't even have the $60M yet. Yes, we surpassed the overall campaign gift, but all of that money is earmarked elsewhere. Doesn't mean there is a bottomless pit of extra money out there to throw at the Pavilion. More to the point, why do we need to do so? We have very nice NBA arena as our preferred option for big games, and always will.

This decision is going to be another 30-year egg on the face moment for the University's administration.

Oh, and that's the same administration that is coming off a NFC, a move into the top 50 of the national rankings and all-time-high application numbers? Yeah, I think I'll trust them on this one.

[kayako]

We have very nice NBA arena as our preferred option for big games, and always will.

How much does the WFC cost to rent? And what's the arrangement for parking/concession income? I can't find this info on the web. Also wondering why we don't play more weekend games there, as it seems like the place is packed or close to full capacity for every Nova game not derailed by natural disaster.

[Letsgonova]

I don't know the rental specifics, but have been told that the break-even vs playing in the Pavilion is around 10,000 in attendance. We are averaging over 18,000 down there this year, so we are raking it in on using the WFC.

[NovaGrad12]

Times Radnor has been able to completely prevent Villanova from doing what it wanted:

- New Law School on the conference center property
- New dormitory along Aldwyn Lane
- New health center along Aldwyn Lane
- 4 additional apartment buildings on West Campus (they negotiated a 20(!) year hold on the second set of 4; I guess we got our way?)
- Lights on the soccer and tennis complexes on West Campus

Heck, they just made us build a $6M pedestrian bridge that we didn't want and that no one wants to use.

That's just from memory in the past ~15 years.

That's easy to say on the money front, but we don't even have the $60M yet. Yes, we surpassed the overall campaign gift, but all of that money is earmarked elsewhere. Doesn't mean there is a bottomless pit of extra money out there to throw at the Pavilion. More to the point, why do we need to do so? We have very nice NBA arena as our preferred option for big games, and always will.

There are ways to work with Radnor and make compromises just as they have done in the past, which you pointed out yourself. Why not present a plan and take it from there? There's no harm in at least trying; I think that's the reason people are upset. It's like the administration accepted defeat before the game even started.

There's no need to explain to me how the capital campaign works. My point was that there has probably never been a more opportune time to get a truly transformative project done. With an active and successful capital campaign underway, and being the defending national champions, now is the time to add seats to a severely undersized arena. I have a feeling you are a member of the wine and cheese crowd and already have a seat at the Pavilion while the rest of us struggle to attend games there because it is too small and has been since its inception.

[kayako]

I don't know the rental specifics, but have been told that the break-even vs playing in the Pavilion is around 10,000 in attendance. We are averaging over 18,000 down there this year, so we are raking it in on using the WFC.

If what you heard is reasonably close, there's literally no reason to play weekend games on campus.