MEMORIAL COLISEUM is saved from demolition—now the city has to figure out what to do with it.
The Trail Blazers have special development rights over the venue, but Mayor Sam Adams has assured the city the future of the coliseum is not a done deal. The Blazers have yet to unveil their grand idea for the historic building, and up until the January 8 deadline, anyone from crackpot to corporation can pitch an idea on the city website (rosequarterdevelopment.org) for how to use the coliseum. The top ideas will eventually go to a vote at city council. Of the 40 proposals citizens pitched so far, we ran five contenders past a panel of qualified judges.
The Judges:
Lew Frederick, a 30-year Northeast Portland resident and recently appointed state representative for the district that includes the Rose Quarter.
Don Mazziotti, former director of the Portland Development Commission (PDC), now heading up the Beaverton Community Development Department.
Vanessa Renwick, a public artist who helped preserve the Lovejoy Columns and made a documentary about the House of Sound, a demolished African American record store on North Williams.
Brian Libby, the architecture critic who fought tooth and nail to stop the city from demolishing Memorial Coliseum last year.
Year-Round Farmers Market
The pitch: Portland’s answer to Seattle’s Pike Place Market. No rain to ruin your organic bread loaves and, hey, the smell of fish inside the coliseum could be “charming.”
FREDERICK: “A centralized farmers market would likely attract a sizable audience, but the smaller markets bring both fresh fruit and veggies and a fresh sense of community and identity that is not quantifiable.”
MAZZIOTTI: “I don’t think the building is designed or suitable for that kind of use. Pike Place Market is far smaller than Memorial Coliseum and its surrounding neighborhood is super dense. That’s what allows Pike Market to flourish, in addition to the tourist trade.”
RENWICK: “This seems like a great idea. Having stopped at the Pike Place Market for over 25 years, it is always packed to the gills. You could take the MAX from the airport to the coliseum, rent a bike, get some food, and ride off to your destination.”
LIBBY: “This could be a great idea for activating Memorial Coliseum’s huge underground exhibit hall, with the help of some skylights. However, any plan that necessitates removing the seating bowl, which is protected in the building’s National Register listing, would disqualify it from consideration in my mind.”
Indoor Amusement Park
The pitch: Apparently Memorial Coliseum is crying out for a log flume. Several groups proposed amusement parks in the modernist building, including one suggesting the construction of a large roller coaster and another pitching a Mall of America-type interior.
MAZZIOTTI: “I think that Portlanders would find a Mall of America concept totally abhorrent to their sensibilities.”
FREDERICK: “I’d anticipate some kind of recreational attraction in the area because, broadly speaking, that’s the niche it has filled for decades. But I doubt being so close to the Lloyd Center and downtown, we’d see a new mall.”
LIBBY: “This is a joke, right? Don’t get me wrong: I’m not above the occasional ride at an amusement park. Portland’s own Oaks Park is a hoot. But the Scrambler and the Tilt-a-Whirl do not make a viable solution for what to do with a modernist glass palace in the center of the city—one built to honor veterans of World War I and II.”
Museum
The pitch: What about an environmental history museum to anchor the newly christened eco-district?
FREDERICK: “A staid exhibit-driven museum? No. Shrinking the arena while providing space for a variety of sports venues or events interests me.”
MAZZIOTTI: “It’s an interesting idea but the operating costs for an obsolete building, which the Memorial Coliseum is, are going to be enormous. While I was at the PDC, we were approached by a group who wanted to develop the coliseum as a peace museum. It was a very good idea totally consistent with the memorial it’s supposed to be, but in the end, you’d have to have a huge philanthropic effort to support the cost involved.”
RENWICK: “I am all for great museums, but the economy is wack here, seeing as the Oregon Historical Society is barely clinging to existence.”
Memorial Athletic and Recreation Center (MARC)
The pitch: Developer Doug Obletz rallied support last year for turning the coliseum into a public gym to include a pool and host some sports events. Obletz has not formally pitched the idea on the city website, yet, saying he’s afraid the Blazers’ special development rights will out-muscle his plan.
MAZZIOTTI: “This is the best idea I’ve heard so far, but again, it’s all a matter of money. Because it would be used by a wide community, I think the capital investment in such a facility could be retired—but the operating cost would be enormous. That is, without a corporate sponsor who could handle the operating deficit.”
LIBBY: “I have mixed feelings. We need a reason for people to come to the Rose Quarter other than just big events or for bars and restaurants. It just has to fit in with the preservation of the coliseum. But so far the MARC plan calls for removing the coliseum’s seating bowl, a fatal flaw.”
Velodrome
The pitch: Portland’s favorite superlative is “best cycling city in America.” How about the city help fund a top-notch bicycle racing track in the coliseum’s bowl?
RENWICK: “I think this is a good idea. Knowing how bike-crazy this town is, it could only be very popular.”
LIBBY: “From both a community development and a financial perspective I don’t think a single-use idea such as a velodrome is a good idea. Memorial Coliseum is a multipurpose arena that already draws as many events as the Rose Garden. Why trade many uses for just one?”
It’s pretty difficult to come up with a plan that costs next-to-nothing upfront, and makes enough money to pay for the high operating costs of “an obsolete building.” What’s the closest to making the cut? Probably the farmer’s market. But such a market will only be seasonal, which means you only meet those operating costs seasonally, meaning 6 months a year you need public investment. And it probably hurts the local farmer’s markets that already exist a bit. It would replace the Pearl market, presumably.
The second goal of a plan is to stimulate further development in the district. Same problem; not enough people coming there 6 months a year to support other business in the area.
The obvious need is to take full advantage of prime real estate, in the core of the city. A velodrome? Quirky, and enjoyable for some, but does not stimulate other businesses and likely to be underused with respect to the importance of the property. Also unlikely to generate enough income. How many times a week will bikers come to ride in a circle? (NASCAR biking.)
The amusement park idea is appealing, as it can be a tourist draw, making it a better use of the property. But in this case, the upfront costs are significant and it’s unclear that the coliseum building does much more than get in the way. You’d need to significantly revamp it. 2/3rds of the amusement park would need to occupy the parking lot, and then do you have enough parking for the area? In the end, smaller rides interfere with Oaks Park and our investment there, and only a few large rides could fit in the Rose Q space, perhaps not enough to sustain the operation.
The Athletic center concept is appealing. Centrally located and on light rail, it is an appropriate use. It would also encourage enough people to use it that other business in the area could be supported, so new retail and restaurants might be able to open in a redevelopment that uses part of the massive parking lot. But the costs of redeveloping the MC building itself would be very high. Also, an athletic center works only if you are charing a lower fee so that a broader portion of the community can use it. Otherwise, charging a full price, you have a nice, private club, like several other private businesses that currently exist. So it’s not a unique use for the property, and you end up driving other existing businesses out of business. It’s not really fair to them that the public is subsidizing a competing business.
My proposal, an Environmental History and Future Museum, works on several levels. (Brief summary; a museum with giant exhibits showing dramatic change in our environment, past, present and predicted, like the fight with the increasing flooding of Venice, demonstrations of the true loss in retreating glaciers, the interaction of protective wetlands and hurricanes, etc. Also retail space for environmental product and service solutions.) Importantly, as an exciting experiential exhibit (not staid as suggested by a judge) it is unique in the market of museums, making it an interesting draw for tourists. An art museum or the like, while enjoyable, is not a “unique” draw. This amazing real estate demands something unique or impressive. And that costs money (gasp!) Any ultra-low-cost plan probably only creates a temporary use that ultimately will be replaced by a better use for the location. And maybe a farmer’s market for 10 years until we have the right plan is the way to go. Which means you are back to looking at a plan such as the Environmental Museum and other unique proposals. Which will all cost money to develop. So we might as well begin discussing that long-term usage now, even if we can’t develop it right away during the recession. Why spend some public money on a temporary use when those changes and improvements will be scrapped later? Might as well continue to operate the MC as an underused concert venue.
But if we brainstorm about a permanent use, then something like the Environmental Museum makes sense. It is a unique use for the property, and it draws tourists who will help stimulate the broader economy. It makes money with ticket sales, like OMSI, and also makes money by retailing environmental products and services (you could purchase the new, easy-to-install home solar system that Lowe’s will sell, for example). It promotes Oregon products and services, increasing jobs and tax revenue. It draws enough people during the day to support the development of RQ shops and restaurants. It promotes Oregon as an environmental technology center in the world. It educates. It entertains (come on – a recreation of a cataclysmic flood that scours out the Columbia River Gorge? That’s fun to watch.)
But it costs money upfront. You bet. If it doesn’t, it’s probably not worth doing long-term. So let’s discuss other ideas that accomplish these goals that mean it’s a smart investment. Something we know we can’t do today during the recession, but can consider in five years. And let’s have a solid plan ready to go by the time our economy is strong again.
Bravo. I especially like the end part..
It’s still a home to vets in the meantime.
Is there a list published of the specific events that the Memorial Coliseum hosted? I remember the number 160 being waved about but nobody was ever able to produce a list or the attendance numbers.
So the idea of a re-education camp for Christians and immigrants from Utah is totally off the table now?
The number of events that happen at the MC isn’t really the issue. The issue is the number of those events that couldn’t quite happily be accommodated next door at the Rose Garden (with upper seating curtained out when needed). The Winterhawks could quite happily move next door for starters.
A museum of some sort (I’d be much more enthused by a Native American museum, since there aren’t any major ones in this part of the world) could bring in some people, but not enough to sustain the building. Likewise, any sort of smaller venue using the current bowl, however much of a boner Libby has for it. A market is the only thing I can see actually being a financial success. So start with that, and then look for other uses (museum being one possibility) that would work around it within the same building.
I like the idea of an environmental museum! My own idea is to relocate the struggling Oregon Gardens to the Memorial Stadium site and call it the Oregon Memorial Arboretum Museum and Performing Arts Center. It would compliment the Japanese Gardens and secure Portland’s world-wide reputation for culture, sustainable living and love of the natural world. It would be a great legacy to leave for the generations of Oregonians yet to come. And, it’s cheap.
A natural history museum would be great- it’s a shame a city our size doesn’t have one. Unfortunately I don’t think we could support it financially right now. So I guess my vote is for the market?…
Stu,
Both PAM and Maryhill have large NA collections. There’s also the Burke in Seattle, which is fantastic.
environment history museum….
“hey kids, load up the car…errr tandem bicycle, we’re going to the real bad time museum. my guilt to smug ratio has been awfully low lately so I’ve decided we’ll start the day racking up guilt on transgressions I didn’t know existed and then end it by patting ourselves on the back for using re-useable shopping bags and buying wind power from PGE.”
Make Portland the beer capitol of the United States…sell it to McMenamins and have them repurpose it into the largest brewery in the world. Add in all sorts of cool restaurants and bars on the premises and create our own version of Oktoberfest: Portlandfest, that could supersede the current Brewfest.
http://www.pdxcoaster.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Market_…)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granville_Isl…
Right, Portland really needs ANOTHER farmers’ market.
the Velodrome would be set up for other events, x-game type stuff. possibly even short-track ice racing. the idea is to have seats that adjust to the event, different track types & configurations. a place to have all kinds of different events, all year. even a configuration that allows for a mid-size concert. perhaps part of it would be have it available, for minimal cost, to community groups, maybe once a week for their special events. have an OSAA skateboarding championship.