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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Ironically, innovativethinking is neither.

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.

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.

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

No. They're not directly comparable venues, mostly because of seating capacity. Again, from the report:

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.

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

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

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.

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

You said:

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.

...?

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?

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.

Actually, Mac, I have read the report.

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

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.

Prove it. If this is true, I'm certainly interested, but I don't believe it (though I could be convinced. Offer real proof).


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?


This is the conversation that needs to be had.


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...).


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:

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?