Off Season News While I have no involvement with UCD, I do design arenas and stadiums for a living so I can posit some (longwinded) hypothesis here-- when the last renovation was done ~10 years ago, the seats were changed to push against the back wall. The also raised the front row so you can see over people walking (standing) on the concourse. The gaps in the seats are for the fire exits that were always there, but they likely got nailed on a change in the fire code. In the 1970s, it was calculated simply as inches of exit space to number of occupants. More recently, you have to consider path of travel, path distance and intermediary pinch points. Likely the concourse wasn't wide enough and the corner exits were too far away from the center seating sections. To make up for the loss of seats, they absolutely should have considered seats for the fourth side. But at the time, the MU was being gutted and there was a temporary textbook store setup there, not to mention average attendance for basketball probably doesn't fill out the demand quotient.
As to the new video board, not ideal for a court sport and sort of precludes viable bleachers on that fourth side. My guess is twofold as to why no center cube. Floor to low steel at center court is listed as 51'. This would be marginal to fit a cube because the accepted minimum safe clearance is 35' to floor. Anything lower becomes dangerous for gymnasts and cheerleaders, not to mention sightline issues from the other end bleachers when configured for an endstage concert or graduation. Modern arenas design their cubes so they can be hoisted into the space between the low and high steel of the roof truss when not in use, but not sure that clear void exists here. The other issue may be that according to the promoter guide there are no permanent hang points (engineered eyelets welded to structural steel) and the load capacity is only 2000lbs per beam section. This is really low by modern standards. A wide screen can distribute the load across multiple beam sections, but a cube may have been too concentrated of a load. Those kind of video screens are fundamentally just a collection of ~12"x12" modules that can be reassembled in any shape and I have done jobs where the venue can reassemble a video wall as a cube, it just takes time and is likely not practical for the level of inhouse technical expertise (or not) that the ARC has. Why on earth they continue to go with Daktronics for video boards is beyond me. They used to be the market leader for quality and service, but they just aren't anymore. The Asian manufacturers have a better product for less than half the cost. Daktronics also purposely changes the size of their modules about every 5 years, fundamentally making repair impossible after that designed obsolescence date unless you hoard spare parts.
I hope new lighting is in scope. Metal halide and fluorescent are pretty antiquated these days. If you are listening, Rocko, PM me if you want advice - Musco has a great product and superior planning services. But Ephesus has some cool features like color correction and DMX universe integration that could really improve the fan experience.
Rec Hall/Pavilion was a really forward thinking design for the 1970s. As life has progressed, sharing a facility between spectator events, career fairs, and recreation uses has become less of a great idea as all of those uses now demand more specialization. At a certain point it is just cheaper to build an arena and an expo hall rather than try to make a transformer building that does both to the satisfaction of the fire marshal. If, over the 10 years of this naming agreement ICA can generate demand for more seats and luxury boxes, I wouldn't be surprised to see a drive for a newer facility. The current one will be over 50 years old by then.