Several urban planners, architects and City Council members are afraid that, in our haste to procure a new arena and NBA team, we've selected a poor location for what will be an enormous public investment. These same critics say we've ignored other potentially viable sites, most notably the old Convention Center. In the world of architecture, urban planning and city business, the stakes don't get much higher than a massive downtown sports arena, all of which has resulted in a heated debate.

While some folks may have voiced a collective "It's about damned time" when City Council voted in June to endorse plans for a Third Ward arena and park, others were urging the city to consider all their options. One of the most outspoken of these voices is architect Murray Whisnant, who says building an arena at the old Convention Center site is a creative and innovative option that for some unknown reason continues to fall on deaf ears.

"The most galling aspect of this is that no one has really even looked at the Convention Center site," Whisnant said. "And it's sort of a mystery as to why. The second aspect that bothers me is nobody has said what it will cost to rearrange Third Ward to accommodate an arena. I think it's astonishing that no one has come up with cost numbers on that, and no one has demanded that from City Council."

Whisnant, along with UNC-Charlotte architecture professor and CL columnist David Walters, held a charrette on Saturday, where a number of folks got together and examined the practicality of the old Convention Center as an arena site. During the meeting, Whisnant and Walters addressed one of the biggest criticisms of the old Convention Center plan -- namely, that an arena simply wouldn't fit there.

"People make that assumption, and it's just not true," Whisnant said. "That's two-dimensional thinking. Plus, that area is accessible to transportation and parking, and there's a lot of vacant land wrapped around that area. At the very least it needs to be looked into."

Together, Walters and Whisnant have come up with a rough, yet what they believe is an innovative and workable, plan. It starts with raising the arena playing floor one level above College Street, thus freeing up space at street level for programmable public space. The arena bowl would splay out over the sidewalk on 4th and Trade Streets, to produce public arcades on both streets, and perhaps link into the overstreet walkway system, providing all weather covered access.

Other specifics include 66,000 square feet of staging and service area, about 160,000 square feet of support and administration spaces, am 11,000 square feet practice court facility, and 128,000 square feet of largely street-level retail, concourse(s), concessions and circulation. The overall arena bowl would be contained in a rectangle 474 x 354 feet. This compares to 410 x 390 feet (approximately) for last year's arena design. Such a plan would mean some seating would have to be reduced at the halfway line and added back at the end zones, and there would be vertical circulation problems, meaning more stairs and escalators than a standard design.

"We're looking at this as, "We want a state-of-the-art city, how can an arena play into that?" Walters said. "That's a much different question than, "We want a state-of-the-art arena, where can we put it?'"

One of the most outspoken critics of Whisnant's plans is architect David Wagner of Wagner Murray Architects. Wagner helped the county develop a plan under the auspices of the Mecklenburg County Parks' Master Plan, in which he looked at a Third Ward park in relationship to the proposed arena, and within the context of a train station and other infrastructure possibilities. When it concerns where he thinks an arena should go, Wagner doesn't mince words.

"The old Convention Center is a stupid site," he said. "But everyone has an opinion. What I believe in is a process. We went through a process to place the arena in Third Ward. We paid for that process, and it's called the 2010 Vision Plan. The plan cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars. It was an interactive, community-based process in which the people spoke. That plan identified Third Ward as a "sports and entertainment district,' which was supported by the city, county, elected officials and community leaders. So why are we still going through this goddam process? As a taxpayer and citizen you ought to be upset."

Wagner acknowledges that Whisnant and Walters' assertion that a sports arena's seating bowl would fit at the Convention Center site is true, but he also says it's beside the point.

"That's no big revelation," Wagner said. "Yes, the bowl itself will fit on the old Convention Center site. What has been overlooked is everything else -- all the ancillary and support services -- that also need to go on the site. The problem is that we don't have faith in ourselves or our processes. This is a perfect example of good intentions gone astray. Urban planning is a proactive process, not a reactive process. We're reacting to what somebody doesn't like: "I don't like the arena in Third Ward, therefore we should put it on the Convention Center.' What's the process involved in that? It's a knee-jerk reaction."

As far as whether sites other than Third Ward were given a fair shake, Wagner said, "That's irrelevant. A basketball arena is about 400 x 600 feet. That fits comfortably in Third Ward. Where you can't put it is in the Convention Center site; it just doesn't work. Were other locations given a fair shake? I couldn't give a goddam."

Jeb Blackwell, Deputy Director of Engineering, says that multiple locations were considered for an arena, including the old Convention Center site. "There were two big reports that evaluated over 25 sites based on a pretty extensive list of criteria, including economic development that it might engender, and the reuse of existing facilities," Blackwell said. "For some reason that fact doesn't seem to have settled into the common consciousness. As far as the old Convention Center, I feel like you would be building a facility with a lot of compromises. There's just too many trade-offs."

City Councilmember Pat Mumford, one of the attendees at Saturday's charette, was intrigued enough by the old Convention Center plans to say the city should at least look it over.

"I'm not comfortable that the city, from a feasibility study standpoint, has looked at the other sites like the old Convention Center in as much detail as we probably could have. And I'm not sure why we haven't, and it's frustrating. I think it may just be a matter of people are tired of this whole thing -- "We have a site that appears to work pretty well in Third Ward, so let's just keep going.' For posterity, we need to really give other locations their day in court. It's not terribly subjective. At the end of the day at least we'll know whether it will work or not. Today we don't have that."

Mumford said he is also concerned about the costs and possible politicking that might arise from rushing the arena process. "If there is a cost overrun, what do we do? I'm concerned about the dollars increasing down the road. If that's going to be the case, let's approve what we really feel the dollars will be. I also foresee a problem as to who is going to make the decisions if there is a disagreement. What if the architect hired by the city doesn't agree with the planner hired by the county? It could potentially become political, and that's the worst thing that could happen."

City Councilmember John Tabor, who was one of three City Council members who voted against the arena and park plan in June, (the others were Harold Cogdell and Don Lochman) has also stated that the city should study its options a little closer before forging ahead.

"I don't necessarily have a problem with the arena being in Third Ward, but I have a huge problem with it being there with the park. That wipes out any economic development opportunities around both these giant public investments. I think we're making an incredible mistake putting those two together in that location.

"As far as the old Convention Center, I'm not nuts about that location either," Tabor continued. "I look at the arena as sparking economic development and growth. I don't think we should put it in the middle of an area that's already built out. I want to put it in an area where all kinds of new commercial properties can be built around it, and you lose that at the old Convention Center."

While the debate continues, the city continues to meet secretly with NBA officials to try to work out a lease agreement for a new arena. The league has indicated it would like to award Charlotte a team to begin play by the 2004-05 season. Meanwhile, the city and county seem to be growing closer to an agreement over the price of the land between Second and Fourth Streets near Graham St. that has been slated for an arena.

Contact Sam Boykin at (704) 944-3623 or sam.boykin@cln.com.