SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Downtown & City of Portland (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=192)
-   -   Rose Quarter Redevelopment (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=152548)

58rhodes Jun 1, 2016 4:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlazerBeav (Post 7459586)
Honest question - what good would come from that? It will continue to be a derelict building without significant investment - and seeing as how we can't even get work done on the roads without a new, specific tax, does anyone honestly foresee that happening?

maybe it would be eligible for fed funds?

babs Jun 1, 2016 5:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 58rhodes (Post 7459720)
maybe it would be eligible for fed funds?

Before any money gets spent on it, there needs to be a plan. I've seen tons of ideas but no plan. Renovating it as an arena will be a money losing proposition. I like the idea of turning it into an ice center. Winterhawks play there plus it's open to the public the rest of the year. No idea if it's financially viable but the first step would be to have a business plan.

It's an awful memorial to veterans. Sunken granite memorials do little to educate future generations of the sacrifices made. Something interactive and interpretive would do a lot more.

I hope there is something more here than a press event.

maccoinnich Jun 1, 2016 7:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7459801)
Before any money gets spent on it, there needs to be a plan. I've seen tons of ideas but no plan.

Here

babs Jun 2, 2016 4:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7459954)

Thanks for posting this.
These plans are all contingent on maintaining the MC as an arena. What's unfortunate is that the business plan is weak to keep it as an arena. Unless Portland State or UP decide to start playing basketball or hockey there, I don't see how the number of events increases enough to justify the spend, especially with an NBA level arena next door. Keeping the underground exhibit hall space would also be a waste. It already looks like a parking garage down there, you could repurpose it as that and redevelop the garages on Broadway.

I'd like to see some proposals that demolishes the inner arena but keeps the outer walls and four posts that hold the place up. Inside that structure, you could build offices, a hotel, something else. What if Regal Cinemas builds a state of the art theater inside that structure? It would keep the integrity of the building while bringing something new to the area. Let's look for a creative reuse and not just assume it has to be an arena.

pylon Jun 2, 2016 6:31 PM

turn it into the james beard public market

maccoinnich Jun 2, 2016 7:26 PM

The building doesn't need to attract a new sports team to be viable as an arena. As the report explains, there a quite a few touring shows that would be interested in a venue of Memorial Coliseum's size, but turn it down because of some big issues:
  • One is that the building doesn't have a loading dock, so all equipment has be brought in and out of the arena by hand. This adds a lot of time to the set up / take down of a show.
  • The roof isn't currently able to support the weight of the equipment many promoters want to hang from it.
  • None of the concession spaces are vented, which limits the type of food that can served.
  • Seats are not ADA accessible.
  • There are no hospitality suites.

The report outlines the cost of improvements that would address deferred maintenance, and address the functional issues above. If they addressed these issues the venue would be able to hold more shows a year, and would make an operating profit. That to me makes a lot more sense that trying to shoehorn a function into the building that it's not well suited to.

babs Jun 2, 2016 8:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7461356)
The building doesn't need to attract a new sports team to be viable as an arena. As the report explains, there a quite a few touring shows that would be interested in a venue of Memorial Coliseum's size, but turn it down because of some big issues:
  • One is that the building doesn't have a loading dock, so all equipment has be brought in and out of the arena by hand. This adds a lot of time to the set up / take down of a show.
  • The roof isn't currently able to support the weight of the equipment many promoters want to hang from it.
  • None of the concession spaces are vented, which limits the type of food that can served.
  • Seats are not ADA accessible.
  • There are no hospitality suites.

The report outlines the cost of improvements that would address deferred maintenance, and address the functional issues above. If they addressed these issues the venue would be able to hold more shows a year, and would make an operating profit. That to me makes a lot more sense that trying to shoehorn a function into the building that it's not well suited to.

There are couple flaws with this.
1. How many shows have bypassed Portland? Did most of them find a way to fit at the Moda Center? Are we talking about one event or enough to fill 50 nights a year? Big difference.
2. At most arenas, touring shows make little to no money on Hospitality Suites. For instance, at the Moda Center, if you buy a suite, you get tickets to all events and all of the $$$ goes to the Blazers.
3. Concession revenue usually split between the arena owner and the resident teams. Touring shows don't make money off food concessions.
4. I remember back in the 80s, the reason the Blazers gave for not having a video board was due to the ceiling joists not being able to hold the weight. Then some touring show hung a hung a bunch of stuff and everything was fine. That's when they ordered the video board.

My bottom line is that I would like to see the Rose Quarter get some life. In order to do so, there needs to be more year round and day/night activity. Spending a ton of money on refurbishing an arena that may add 20 nights a year of activity will not do it. Let's get creative and see what other ways we can bring life back to that area. A remodeled arena is keeping status quo. We can do better.

eric cantona Jun 2, 2016 8:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7461427)
There are couple flaws with this.
1. How many shows have bypassed Portland? Did most of them find a way to fit at the Moda Center? Are we talking about one event or enough to fill 50 nights a year? Big difference.
2. At most arenas, touring shows make little to no money on Hospitality Suites. For instance, at the Moda Center, if you buy a suite, you get tickets to all events and all of the $$$ goes to the Blazers.
3. Concession revenue usually split between the arena owner and the resident teams. Touring shows don't make money off food concessions.
4. I remember back in the 80s, the reason the Blazers gave for not having a video board was due to the ceiling joists not being able to hold the weight. Then some touring show hung a hung a bunch of stuff and everything was fine. That's when they ordered the video board.

My bottom line is that I would like to see the Rose Quarter get some life. In order to do so, there needs to be more year round and day/night activity. Spending a ton of money on refurbishing an arena that may add 20 nights a year of activity will not do it. Let's get creative and see what other ways we can bring life back to that area. A remodeled arena is keeping status quo. We can do better.

did you even bother to read the report cited?

babs Jun 2, 2016 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 7461457)
did you even bother to read the report cited?

I did, did you?
If we want life brought back to the Rose Quarter, it's time to look at ways of reusing the building as something other than an arena. If we keep sticking to notion that it needs to stay an arena, then we'll continue to have this same discussion 10 years from now.

eric cantona Jun 3, 2016 1:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7461514)
I did, did you?
If we want life brought back to the Rose Quarter, it's time to look at ways of reusing the building as something other than an arena. If we keep sticking to notion that it needs to stay an arena, then we'll continue to have this same discussion 10 years from now.

I did. I actually know some of the people that worked on it. I'm going to continue to trust their judgement as professionals to inform me about what makes sense for that structure. anecdotal information is not going to trump research and experience for me.

BTW - this building will NEVER be responsible to bringing life back to the Rose Quarter. A) there never was life to bring back at the "Rose Quarter" because it's a fabricated place designed with suburban sensibilities; and B) the entire area needs to be reintegrated into the fabric of the city with a mix of uses and users. that entails pretty massive investment in new construction.

babs Jun 3, 2016 4:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 7461716)
I did. I actually know some of the people that worked on it. I'm going to continue to trust their judgement as professionals to inform me about what makes sense for that structure. anecdotal information is not going to trump research and experience for me.

BTW - this building will NEVER be responsible to bringing life back to the Rose Quarter. A) there never was life to bring back at the "Rose Quarter" because it's a fabricated place designed with suburban sensibilities; and B) the entire area needs to be reintegrated into the fabric of the city with a mix of uses and users. that entails pretty massive investment in new construction.

I know some of the people behind the planning and construction of the Moda Center so I think I know what I am talking about.

It looks like you are calling for the demolition of MC. Because of location of that building and the desires by some for it to continue as an arena ensure that the area cannot be turned back into a part of the city.

maccoinnich Jun 3, 2016 7:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7461427)
There are couple flaws with this.
1. How many shows have bypassed Portland? Did most of them find a way to fit at the Moda Center? Are we talking about one event or enough to fill 50 nights a year? Big difference.
2. At most arenas, touring shows make little to no money on Hospitality Suites. For instance, at the Moda Center, if you buy a suite, you get tickets to all events and all of the $$$ goes to the Blazers.
3. Concession revenue usually split between the arena owner and the resident teams. Touring shows don't make money off food concessions.
4. I remember back in the 80s, the reason the Blazers gave for not having a video board was due to the ceiling joists not being able to hold the weight. Then some touring show hung a hung a bunch of stuff and everything was fine. That's when they ordered the video board.

My bottom line is that I would like to see the Rose Quarter get some life. In order to do so, there needs to be more year round and day/night activity. Spending a ton of money on refurbishing an arena that may add 20 nights a year of activity will not do it. Let's get creative and see what other ways we can bring life back to that area. A remodeled arena is keeping status quo. We can do better.

Without answering your points individually, I'll direct you to a City website that includes the previously linked to study, as well as the appendices and supporting documents. Suffice to say these are things that have been looked at.

Earlier you said that "before any money gets spent on it, there needs to be a plan." Well, there has been a lot of planning. The impression that I'm getting is that you just don't want any money spent on it at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7461832)
I know some of the people behind the planning and construction of the Moda Center so I think I know what I am talking about.

It looks like you are calling for the demolition of MC. Because of location of that building and the desires by some for it to continue as an arena ensure that the area cannot be turned back into a part of the city.

I agree that the Rose Quarter needs to be made more active, but I disagree that the converting Memorial Coliseum to some other use is the best way to do it. There's a lot of land that's vacant or underused around the building. Converting that land to higher and better uses would do wonders for the area, and complement VMC.

tworivers Jun 3, 2016 8:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7461889)
I agree that the Rose Quarter needs to be made more active, but I disagree that the converting Memorial Coliseum to some other use is the best way to do it. There's a lot of land that's vacant or underused around the building. Converting that land to higher and better uses would do wonders for the area, and complement VMC.

I couldn't agree more. With high-density mixed-use clustered around a renovated MC; some sort of connection from MC over Interstate Ave (at least) towards the river; a few reconnected streets; the PPS building gone; and a human-friendly road diet on that stretch of Broadway, it could be one of the coolest areas of the city. The view of central Portland from that general vantage point is pretty stupendous, too. Throw in some sort of grand institutional-cultural statement, like an Allied Works-designed new museum (contemporary art, city museum, history of the west), and, damn... fingers crossed that something like that happens in my lifetime.

babs Jun 3, 2016 2:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7461889)
I agree that the Rose Quarter needs to be made more active, but I disagree that the converting Memorial Coliseum to some other use is the best way to do it. There's a lot of land that's vacant or underused around the building. Converting that land to higher and better uses would do wonders for the area, and complement VMC.

And I couldn't disagree with you more that keeping it as an arena is the best way to go. We already have an arena right across the walkway. The business case is weak for a remodel. If the Blazers start losing business to this newly remodeled arena, watch them cut deals to attract to draw more events over. That's the cold reality of competition.

Finding a new use for the building is the best way to kick off redevelopment of the area. Trust me, 10 years from now, we will still be having this debate unless our leaders step forward and develop a new vision for this area.

urbanlife Jun 3, 2016 7:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7462093)
And I couldn't disagree with you more that keeping it as an arena is the best way to go. We already have an arena right across the walkway. The business case is weak for a remodel. If the Blazers start losing business to this newly remodeled arena, watch them cut deals to attract to draw more events over. That's the cold reality of competition.

Finding a new use for the building is the best way to kick off redevelopment of the area. Trust me, 10 years from now, we will still be having this debate unless our leaders step forward and develop a new vision for this area.

Why would the Blazers lose business? They would still be playing in the Moda Center. If anything, it makes more sense to try to make both arenas more active to generate more money all around.

The problem with all of this is that divide between just tear it down and keep it as is. If it had been torn down right after the Moda Center was completed, we obviously wouldn't be having this debate, but since it is still there and the metro is growing, it makes sense to look at this as an opportunity that very few cities have.

babs Jun 3, 2016 8:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife (Post 7462445)
Why would the Blazers lose business? They would still be playing in the Moda Center. If anything, it makes more sense to try to make both arenas more active to generate more money all around.

The problem with all of this is that divide between just tear it down and keep it as is. If it had been torn down right after the Moda Center was completed, we obviously wouldn't be having this debate, but since it is still there and the metro is growing, it makes sense to look at this as an opportunity that very few cities have.

Why would the Blazers lose business?
If a remodeled MC started to draw events away from the Moda Center (yes, even the small ones), you bet they will try to win that business over. They own that place so they have every incentive to keep it as busy as possible. They could careless about the MC.

Guys, it's been 21 years that we have been debating the future of the MC. 21 years of nothing happening. If you failed to get something done for 21 years, you'd find a different solution. I'm not calling for the building to be torn down, I'm saying that the best bet is to repurpose it. I came back from a trip to Spain and Italy. Repurposing of old buildings is very common over there. We keep the exterior structure in place and find a better use for the interior. What's wrong with that?

TowerPower Jun 4, 2016 12:57 AM

It's a very unique building - how often do you get natural light in an arena? It's too bad the indoor track idea fell through - that would have been awesome. I could see it making an interesting museum.

58rhodes Jun 4, 2016 1:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babs (Post 7462552)
Why would the Blazers lose business?
If a remodeled MC started to draw events away from the Moda Center (yes, even the small ones), you bet they will try to win that business over. They own that place so they have every incentive to keep it as busy as possible. They could careless about the MC.

Guys, it's been 21 years that we have been debating the future of the MC. 21 years of nothing happening. If you failed to get something done for 21 years, you'd find a different solution. I'm not calling for the building to be torn down, I'm saying that the best bet is to repurpose it. I came back from a trip to Spain and Italy. Repurposing of old buildings is very common over there. We keep the exterior structure in place and find a better use for the interior. What's wrong with that?

I dont think we should worry about Paul Allen and the Blazers---Maybe it could be used for the Arena Football team--If PA wants more revenue for the Moda the NHL would love a team here. Im sure the Football team could use a rent reduction--just sayin--maybe even the Winterhawks afterall its just jr hockey and the MC would still be one of the biggest arenas in the league.

maccoinnich Jun 9, 2016 7:11 PM

Quote:

Can 'National Treasure' label lead to plan for Veterans Memorial Coliseum?

http://image.oregonlive.com/home/oli...b8eb8eb080.jpg

A national historic preservation group stepped forward Thursday to help Portland officials attempt to solve a perpetually unanswered puzzle: What should be done with Veterans Memorial Coliseum?

And if the National Trust for Historic Preservation is actually able to deliver, it'll accomplish what Mayor Charlie Hales and former Mayor Sam Adams could not.

The 56-year-old sports venue has a ton of deferred maintenance and is essentially a money pit. But on Thursday, in an effort to help save the building, the preservation group labeled it a "National Treasure."
...continues at the Oregonian.

innovativethinking Jun 9, 2016 9:05 PM

Rolls eyes

babs Jun 9, 2016 11:53 PM

Love the building but after 21 years, I would hope someone has a better idea than a sports arena for the interior. Today's announcement is nothing more than a news conference. Get the Gerding guys or Venerables Properties involved with the condition that the outer shell must be maintained and see what they come up with.

Derek Jun 10, 2016 1:49 AM

I seriously think they're just letting it stand for another ~20 years until the Moda Center becomes "old" (by professional sporting standards) at which point they'll tear down the Coliseum and build a new arena for the Blazers. No clue what would happen to the Moda Center though...

2oh1 Jun 10, 2016 2:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek (Post 7469718)
I seriously think they're just letting it stand for another ~20 years until the Moda Center becomes "old" (by professional sporting standards) at which point they'll tear down the Coliseum and build a new arena for the Blazers. No clue what would happen to the Moda Center though...

This is exactly what I think.

The discussion about what to do with Memorial Coliseum has been going on for over 20 years. There's no reason to think it won't go on for another 20.

I only see one of two realistic outcomes.

#1: The Blazers decide they need a new arena and aren't willing to move out of the Rose Quarter, so they threaten to leave Portland, at which point, the talk about how important the MC is will be instantly forgotten. It'll be torn down and a new arena will replace it... and then we'll have to figure out what to do with the frigging Moda Center.

#2: The Big One hits, bringing the MC to the ground.

Worst case scenario: the Blazers decide they need a new arena, but they upgrade the MC just enough so they can move back into it while the Moda Center is leveled and replaced, leaving us with another fifty years of bogus plan after bogus plan to find a new use for the MC.

AcmeGreg Jun 10, 2016 2:25 PM

The elegant simplicity of this architecture is just breathtaking. Imagine its impact within the context of early 60s Portland, not to mention the national exposure it brought to the city. I remember hearing about it as a kid living in Southern California. The NCAA men's basketball tournament was brought to Portland because of this building.

TowerPower Jun 10, 2016 8:48 PM

People have a tendency to undervalue "recent" history - structures that are old enough that they're functionally obsolete and rundown, yet not so old as to be considered historically important or quaint. This shortsightedness has lead to the destruction of countless notable buildings - Penn Station comes to mind as a tragic example. (though modern buildings tend to be lacking in the "quaint" department ;)

maccoinnich Jun 11, 2016 5:34 AM

Quote:

Portland’s Modernist Veterans Memorial Coliseum Named City’s First National Treasure

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/oAY...e_crUofW.0.jpg

Designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, Portland’s iconic Veterans Memorial Coliseum (VMC) is a modernist gem—one of the finest International-Style civic buildings in the west. And today, the National Trust for Historic Preservation designated the Coliseum a National Treasure, a first for the Oregon city.

When it was built in 1960, the 135,000-square-foot VMC was a feat of engineering, with its structural weight supported by just four columns, creating an expansive, uninterrupted arena surrounded by windows.

After years of deferred maintenance and neglect—and a City Council debate over whether to demolish the structure—the National Trust will now work with locals to create a restoration and renovation plan for the building, returning it to its former beauty and transforming the interior into a state-of-the-art civic venue.

"We believe this mid-century masterpiece is poised to once again become a symbol of Portland’s highest aspirations," said Brian Libby, member of Friends of Memorial Coliseum, a local group supporting the VMC preservation. "This building’s potential in its intended open-curtain configuration, with a 360-degree view from your seats to the outside, has remained hidden away even from Oregonians who have spent their lives attending the Coliseum. We’re inspired to renew its possibilities and build on its design’s cultural and economic value."

...continues at Curbed.

65MAX Jun 11, 2016 7:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TowerPower (Post 7470609)
People have a tendency to undervalue "recent" history - structures that are old enough that they're functionally obsolete and rundown, yet not so old as to be considered historically important or quaint. This shortsightedness has lead to the destruction of countless notable buildings - Penn Station comes to mind as a tragic example. (though modern buildings tend to be lacking in the "quaint" department ;)

100% agree. Most people have no clue what a groundbreaking building this was for 1960. I don't know if it's best use now will continue to be an arena, or if it will be a market, museum, community center, sport complex, theaters, aquarium, shops and restaurants..... who knows, it could be almost anything. The important thing is that it's not going to be ripped out because some random developer wants a vacant piece of land. There are an infinite number of ways that the Coliseum can be incorporated into its surroundings and become a neighborhood anchor instead of an isolated object.

innovativethinking Jun 11, 2016 4:29 PM

How New York can tear down Yankee Stadium - a place with way more history and tradition than the Coliseum and not have anyone blink an eye while we can't let go of a waste of space and money that this building has become is beyond me.

tworivers Jun 11, 2016 8:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7471230)
How New York can tear down Yankee Stadium - a place with way more history and tradition than the Coliseum and not have anyone blink an eye while we can't let go of a waste of space and money that this building has become is beyond me.

No one blinked an eye, huh?

Lucky for us, you're not going to get your way.

Someday MC will be the gorgeous centerpiece to a re-knit urban fabric in the immediate vicinity, including the land PPS currently is occupying.

RainDog Jun 12, 2016 4:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tworivers (Post 7471342)
Someday MC will be the gorgeous centerpiece to a re-knit urban fabric...

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I find this building to be a bit of an eyesore. I've been inside it, I've walked all around the outside and of course stared at it from the other side of the river. Though I can appreciate the "floating concrete bowl inside of a glass box" concept, the execution leaves something to be desired. When I look at VMC it brings to mind the generic Office/Industrial park buildings I was surrounded by growing up in San Jose. A large vacuous square building, that to me at least is completely uninspiring.:shrug:

I understand the desire to repurpose this building from a sustainability point of view. It's generally better to repurpose than to discard, but I don't see this as any sort of aesthetic gem.

Not that there is anything wrong with any of you finding joy in this building. I just don't personally. But hey, different strokes for different folks. :cheers:

PdX Farr Jun 12, 2016 8:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tworivers (Post 7471342)
No one blinked an eye, huh?

Lucky for us, you're not going to get your way.

Someday MC will be the gorgeous centerpiece to a re-knit urban fabric in the immediate vicinity, including the land PPS currently is occupying.

People with this mindset are exactly what is wrong with this city. There is no way this building as is, repurposed or not, will ever be a "centerpiece" of anything. Its a stadium. There is NOTHING SPECIAL about it anymore. Dream on in the past all you want. "It was so amaze in the 60's". Well guess what, its not the 60's anymore. this site can be a million other beneficial things, but staying in its current form, even if renovated or "repurposed", is not one of them.

Stadiums have been revolutionary for their time thorough out the years and have been replace for more revolutionary stadiums. Its called progression, not dwelling on the past.

This building is nothing more than a eyesore from the inside and out. The only people that don't agree with that are a very small minority mostly in the very small architectural community around here. They speak loud and look for cameras and push for getting this dump on national protected lists for personal reasons. There has yet to be a single good proposal to "repurpose" this place that will make it solvent.

innovativethinking Jun 12, 2016 4:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PdX Farr (Post 7471656)
People with this mindset are exactly what is wrong with this city. There is no way this building as is, repurposed or not, will ever be a "centerpiece" of anything. Its a stadium. There is NOTHING SPECIAL about it anymore. Dream on in the past all you want. "It was so amaze in the 60's". Well guess what, its not the 60's anymore. this site can be a million other beneficial things, but staying in its current form, even if renovated or "repurposed", is not one of them.

Stadiums have been revolutionary for their time thorough out the years and have been replace for more revolutionary stadiums. Its called progression, not dwelling on the past.

This building is nothing more than a eyesore from the inside and out. The only people that don't agree with that are a very small minority mostly in the very small architectural community around here. They speak loud and look for cameras and push for getting this dump on national protected lists for personal reasons. There has yet to be a single good proposal to "repurpose" this place that will make it solvent.

It's trash I agree

maccoinnich Jun 12, 2016 5:00 PM

Would you prefer it if it had less glass, but maybe, I dunno, had some brown metal panels on it?

65MAX Jun 12, 2016 6:23 PM

Maybe if they put an Apple logo on it, some of you would like it better? It's strange that a glass box built now is the best thing since sliced bread. But built 55 years ago? OMG, it's too old, tear it down and start over. I'm REALLY glad shortsighted people like that aren't making the decisions here.

2oh1 Jun 12, 2016 6:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 65MAX (Post 7471937)
Maybe if they put an Apple logo on it, some of you would like it better?

Maybe if it had a purpose. Maybe if it got enough use to justify the amount of prime land it eats up. Maybe if over two decades of failed plans for it hadn't already passed by with no outcome other than money lost. Maybe if we had reason to believe two more decades of the same aren't the best we can expect for it, if not longer. Much longer. I'd be thrilled if we could repurpose it, but two decades of attempts have been fruitless.

maccoinnich Jun 12, 2016 6:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 7471945)
Maybe if it had a purpose.

I guess people think that if they keep repeating this, it will become true. Veterans Memorial Coliseum hosts well over a hundred events a year, including (just yesterday!) the start of the Grand Floral Parade. With investment, it could hold more and larger events.

innovativethinking Jun 12, 2016 7:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7471952)
I guess people think that if they keep repeating this, it will become true. Veterans Memorial Coliseum hosts well over a hundred events a year, including (just yesterday!) the start of the Grand Floral Parade. With investment, it could more and larger events.

And just like the math says time after time it still would lose money.

You guys read the study provided last year by the city, that even if they spent between $35.1M & $142M upgrading the coliseum, it still wouldn't make a difference, with the yearly losses adding up to half a million bucks.

Again the math tells us time and time again.

Lets be real here. The memorial part of Memorial Coliseum was a fountain and a wall on the lower level that most people never saw and has been broken for yesrs. The only reason it was a memorial in the first place was back in the days when it was built it was easier to get the package approved by voters if it was a memorial to our war heroes. As a memorial these days, it's more an insult given its sad state.

maccoinnich Jun 12, 2016 7:18 PM

That's actually not what the report says, but whatever.

65MAX Jun 12, 2016 7:28 PM

Ironically, innovativethinking is neither.

2oh1 Jun 12, 2016 7:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7471952)
I guess people think that if they keep repeating this, it will become true. Veterans Memorial Coliseum hosts well over a hundred events a year, including (just yesterday!) the start of the Grand Floral Parade.

Unless something has changed over the past three or four years, it's main use is assemblies. ASSEMBLIES, with fewer than 100 people. Yes, yesterday it hosted the start of the Grand Floral Parade. It's just a shame there are 365 other days in 2016.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7471952)
With investment, it could hold more and larger events.

Wouldn't it be taking those events away from Moda Center and other venues? Spending money with the left hand to take money away from the right is a net loss.

maccoinnich Jun 12, 2016 8:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 7472001)
Unless something has changed over the past three or four years, it's main use is assemblies. ASSEMBLIES, with fewer than 100 people. Yes, yesterday it hosted the start of the Grand Floral Parade. It's just a shame there are 365 other days in 2016.

Not true. The building has an annual attendance of 385,000, with events as described as follows:

Quote:

Despite its condition and lack of amenities, the VMC still sees consistent use and has a diverse event mix including sporting events (e.g., Portland Winterhawks and several Oregon School Activities Association championships), concerts, shows (e.g., Disney and Cirque de Soleil in 2015, Fright Town for last 10 years), conventions (e.g., Craft Brewers Convention reception in 2015), small and large meetings, and civic events (e.g., regional high school and community college graduations and the Rose Festival Grand Floral Parade).

....

The VMC has served, and continues to serve, a needed civic purpose. According to research by Convention Sports and Leisure International (CSL), the VMC currently has more events per year than many of the market study’s benchmark facilities, averaging 117 annual events over the last three years, and significantly higher attendance, almost 400,000 per year. Because of its pricing structure, the size of the facility and the variety of spaces available for use, many of the current uses/events would have a hard time finding alternative locations were the VMC no longer available (e.g., graduations, small conventions and special events such as Fright Town).
Quote:

Wouldn't it be taking those events away from Moda Center and other venues? Spending money with the left hand to take money away from the right is a net loss.
No. They're not directly comparable venues, mostly because of seating capacity. Again, from the report:

Quote:

The CSL report indicates the VMC has the potential to expand its use/event mix and improve its operating financials by filling a needed facility niche in Portland. A spectator and event facility with flexible seating for 3,000 to 8,000 and a large open floor area is not currently available in Portland and there is demand for such a facility.

2oh1 Jun 12, 2016 9:09 PM

The "facts" used to justify keeping Memorial Coliseum are hilarious.

"Because of its pricing structure, the size of the facility and the variety of spaces available for use, many of the current uses/events would have a hard time finding alternative locations were the VMC no longer available (e.g., graduations, small conventions and special events such as Fright Town"

...and yet, upgrading Memorial Coliseum would make it no longer viable for many of those events due to increased pricing, unless the MC intends to be run at a loss since it's losing money now even without the millions that upgrades would cost.

"A spectator and event facility with flexible seating for 3,000 to 8,000 and a large open floor area is not currently available in Portland and there is demand for such a facility."

...and yet, upgrading Memorial Coliseum would make it no longer viable for many of the events which, in theory, justify its existence.

2oh1 Jun 12, 2016 9:11 PM

Does anybody have a link to events at the MC? Surely, this is only scratching the surface.

innovativethinking Jun 12, 2016 9:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7471978)
That's actually not what the report says, but whatever.

It actually does. Check it out

"No matter how much money Portland officials sink into Veterans Memorial Coliseum, the aging city-owned venue looks to be a money-loser.

That's the takeaway from a new consulting report that evaluated five renovation options, ranging in cost from $35.1 million for basic upgrades to $142.9 million to convert the arena into a track facility.

Those renovations would do little to attract new visitors or events, however, and they're unlikely to generate enough new revenue to cover debt payments tied to the expensive upgrades"

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...erans_mem.html

maccoinnich Jun 12, 2016 9:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 7472081)
The "facts" used to justify keeping Memorial Coliseum are hilarious.

"Because of its pricing structure, the size of the facility and the variety of spaces available for use, many of the current uses/events would have a hard time finding alternative locations were the VMC no longer available (e.g., graduations, small conventions and special events such as Fright Town"

...and yet, upgrading Memorial Coliseum would make it no longer viable for many of those events due to increased pricing, unless the MC intends to be run at a loss since it's losing money now even without the millions that upgrades would cost.

"A spectator and event facility with flexible seating for 3,000 to 8,000 and a large open floor area is not currently available in Portland and there is demand for such a facility."

...and yet, upgrading Memorial Coliseum would make it no longer viable for many of the events which, in theory, justify its existence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 7472082)
Does anybody have a link to events at the MC? Surely, this is only scratching the surface.

So, 2oh1, you are now conceding that that VMC does in fact have a purpose?

And, as I've already explained, one of the problems with VMC is that it doesn't have a loading dock. It therefore takes much longer than industry standard to put up or take down a show. This, along with other improvements, would make it perfectly feasible to hold more events per year, without displacing things like the high school graduations that currently happen there.

maccoinnich Jun 12, 2016 9:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7472091)
It actually does. Check it out

"No matter how much money Portland officials sink into Veterans Memorial Coliseum, the aging city-owned venue looks to be a money-loser.

That's the takeaway from a new consulting report that evaluated five renovation options, ranging in cost from $35.1 million for basic upgrades to $142.9 million to convert the arena into a track facility.

Those renovations would do little to attract new visitors or events, however, and they're unlikely to generate enough new revenue to cover debt payments tied to the expensive upgrades"

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...erans_mem.html

I'd encourage you to actually read the report, and not cherry pick quotes from the Oregonian out of context.

You said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking (Post 7471977)
And just like the math says time after time it still would lose money.

You guys read the study provided last year by the city, that even if they spent between $35.1M & $142M upgrading the coliseum, it still wouldn't make a difference, with the yearly losses adding up to half a million bucks.

The report said:

http://i.imgur.com/t0VhUm9.jpg?1

In the most likely of the options to move ahead ("Tenant/User Enhancements" or "Strategic Market Enhancements") the arena would make an operating profit of $253,000 or $449,000 a year.

2oh1 Jun 12, 2016 9:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich (Post 7472092)
So, 2oh1, you are now conceding that that VMC does in fact have a purpose?

...?

Over twenty years of attempts to revitalize, repurpose, find a use for or even a justification for (call it what you will) Memorial Coliseum have accomplished nothing other than to waste money. Over twenty years.

How much money has been spent on those decades of attempts? Seriously, I'd love to see a dollar figure.

How much money has Memorial Coliseum lost since the Blazers moved out over twenty years ago? Seriously, I'd love to see a dollar figure.

Memorial Coliseum is gorgeous, but is it the best use of the land it sits on? Is it the best use of the money it has cost and lost for over twenty years?

58rhodes Jun 12, 2016 9:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 7472103)
...?

Over twenty years of attempts to revitalize, repurpose, find a use for or even a justification for (call it what you will) Memorial Coliseum have accomplished nothing other than to waste money. Over twenty years.

How much money has been spent on those decades of attempts? Seriously, I'd love to see a dollar figure.

How much money has Memorial Coliseum lost since the Blazers moved out over twenty years ago? Seriously, I'd love to see a dollar figure.

Memorial Coliseum is gorgeous, but is it the best use of the land it sits on? Is it the best use of the money it has cost and lost for over twenty years?

I guess the big question is what is the demand for the land?

maccoinnich Jun 12, 2016 9:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 7472103)
...?

Over twenty years of attempts to revitalize, repurpose, find a use for or even a justification for (call it what you will) Memorial Coliseum have accomplished nothing other than to waste money. Over twenty years.

How much money has been spent on those decades of attempts? Seriously, I'd love to see a dollar figure.

How much money has Memorial Coliseum lost since the Blazers moved out over twenty years ago? Seriously, I'd love to see a dollar figure.

Memorial Coliseum is gorgeous, but is it the best use of the land it sits on? Is it the best use of the money it has cost and lost for over twenty years?


You said that the building "doesn't have a purpose" and then backed it up by stating that it's mostly used for events with "fewer than 100 people". You are entitled to own your opinions about the building, but you're not entitled to your own facts. The building is used, does have a purpose, and actually has pretty high attendance.

As for your other questions, I'm not going to bother answering them one by one, because they are actually covered in the report that you have evidently not read.

2oh1 Jun 12, 2016 11:26 PM

Actually, Mac, I have read the report.

So many of the numbers and facts in it seem to have been cherry picked.

Quote:

"there appears to be demand in the local market for an updated flexible venue with 3,000-8,000 seats. While expensive, renovating the VMC will cost much less than building a new facility of this size..."
Note how there's no mention of how many of those events are currently being held at Moda Center, meaning, a ton of money may be spent to take revenue away from one venue to give it to another.

Quote:

"It’s also worth noting that the estimated cumulative economic impact associated with these options is $2.1 billion over an expected 30-year span for the Tenant/User Enhancements and $3.5 billion for Strategic Market Enhancements over the expected 40-year span."
Prove it. If this is true, I'm certainly interested, but I don't believe it (though I could be convinced. Offer real proof).


Quote:

"Permanent closure and eventual deconstruction of the VMC should remain on the table. This option would be contentious and challenging to realize and the process of preparing for demolition, developing a redevelopment plan, and finding willing development partners would take several years to organize and would require significant resources. Through it all, the unanswered question remains about what would take the place of the VMC and how it would provide a greater public benefit than renovation of the current facility."
This is the path that makes the most sense. I see no reason to believe we won't be having this exact same conversation five, ten, fifteen, twenty years from now and beyond. And since the 2012 plan fell through (even though the city spent millions in the expectation it would come to fruition), why should we believe that won't happen again now?


Quote:

"The biggest decision facing the City is this: Should the VMC be preserved as a public spectator facility for the next 20 to 40 years?"
This is the conversation that needs to be had.


Quote:

"Despite its condition and lack of amenities, the VMC still sees consistent use and has a diverse event mix including sporting events (e.g., Portland Winterhawks and several Oregon School Activities Association championships), concerts, shows (e.g., Disney and Cirque de Soleil in 2015, Fright Town for last 10 years), conventions (e.g., Craft Brewers Convention reception in 2015), small and large meetings, and civic events (e.g., regional high school and community college graduations and the Rose Festival Grand Floral Parade)."
I would challenge them to provide a daily list of all events at Memorial Coliseum along with analysis of whether the venue's existence and costs are justified based on how it's actually used. Could those events be held elsewhere? SHOULD those events be held elsewhere? And if these events are so important for the MC, how many of them would be lost with each of the options listed in the report? In some cases, most if not all. In other cases, it's assumed those current events would continue, but that seems like false analysis to me since renovations would increase costs and change the venue itself, potentially making it unusable by those events (granted, the assumption is they'd be replaced by others, but still...).


Quote:

"None of the scenarios are able to produce a direct return on investment (ROI) for the needed capital investment. This is not an uncommon outcome for facilities of this nature. Nationally and locally, many, if not most, spectator facilities, performing arts venues, and exposition and convention centers have some component of public funding for either their capital investment or ongoing operations, or both."
The question is, does Portland NEED it? With so many other pressing needs (crumbling roads, lead in school water, air pollution, housing... among so many others ...is this the best use of money that we'd know a best case scenario shows we wouldn't get a return on investment for the needed capital? I'm not saying the answer isn't yes. I'm saying I want to know.

The Blazers played at Memorial Coliseum for 34 years. They're already in their 21st year at Moda Center, which means it's just a matter of time before we're having this same discussion about TWO aging arenas instead of one. I can't believe I'm saying this, but, thank god Moda Center isn't pretty.


I think the track & field version is absolutely LOL-worthy:

Quote:

New indoor track and field events are assumed to include international and national events as well as regional, collegiate, invitational and local events. While the scope of work includes items to accommodate indoor bicycle events, the track size would not meet international standards for sanctioned races, making it unclear how many ticketed events might be held.
Call me skeptical.

I can't help wondering if we NEED the MC, and if the MC is the best use for such prime land. It'd be different if we were talking about a swath of concrete and asphalt in the burbs, but we're not. Is the MC the best use of such prime central city land?


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.