Plans have been developing for the renovation of the famous Pauley Pavilion.
Fans of UCLA athletics, students and alumni both, are concerned about whether the changes made to the historic home of the Bruins will match the legacy of UCLA basketball and continue to foster an energetic Den.
Now that plans are finalized, students can breathe a sigh of relief, but season ticket holders are entitled to question the financial viability of the proposed plan. UCLA athletics expect current and future season ticket-holders to make grand donations to finance the project in exchange for better seating.
A heated debate has surrounded all aspects of the project from the beginning. The decision to renovate instead of rebuild, as well as which architect to hire, brought criticism and praise. The project currently stands as a $185 million renovation.
This amount is steep considering USC built the new Galen Center for $145 million. In this financial climate, many critics think this estimated cost is incredibly high. Chancellor Gene Block did comment that construction costs would be low because of the slow growth in the industry currently, but regardless, the cost is high as it stands. Fans are left to bear the burden of these high costs.
To fund this pricey project, the renovation committee is relying heavily on the Campaign of Champions. Donors who give large contributions to this campaign will accrue points that will give them priority in seat allotments for the renovated pavilion. It is impossible not to consider donations in the new seating allocation, but the renovation committee’s dependence on campaign contributions is contrary to the spirit of UCLA’s overall commitment to affordability and the citizens of California.
In a project of this magnitude, it is difficult to please everyone, but organizers remain firm that the current plan is optimal. Some supporters of the renovation were disappointed with the chosen design. Critics of the accepted plan include Richard Bergman, the former chairman of the volunteer committee for the renovation. He, and reputed architect Frank Gehry, who worked on the design of the Walt Disney Concert Hall, criticized the surrounding ring of walkways and other aspects of the project. Season ticket holders have reason to worry when such notable figures remain doubtful. The debate surrounding the plan legitimizes fans’ fears about contributing.
An undeniable success of the plan is the seat allocation for the Den. The student section will still have 2,000 courtside seats and upper seating available for season ticket holders.
The number of seats remains the same, but the placement of the seats on both the south and west sides of the court will bring a bigger, perhaps more intimidating, student presence to the court’s edges.
The new placement of the rambunctious student section will make Pauley Pavilion the most feared court by opponents in the Pac-10. Organizers should be applauded for making student seating a priority in the renovation plan, since that is the source of energy at games. Unfortunately, the organizers did not also make affordability a priority.
In any plan of this magnitude, one that involves so many perspectives and logistical obstacles, there will be criticism. Overall, the proposed plan fittingly considers the pavilion’s legacy and the students’ needs. It doesn’t, however, make tickets affordable for alumni and other local fans. Unfortunately with any costly project, organizers become too reliant on large financial contributions. Season ticket holders are now obligated to exorbitant donations to show their Bruin pride.
UCLA’s commitment to affordability obviously does not extend to athletics. The renovation plan is finalized and now the only option for fans is to suck it up and pay the price. The committee should have been more cautious in setting the price of the renovation so ticket holders aren’t punished for their commitment to the Bruins.
E-mail Mier at smier@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.