The Fat Lady often sings for historic stadiums
While Portland preservationists fight to save their historic Coliseum, another sports venue is destined for a cheesy end.
Stadiums tend not to get much respect, preservation-wise. While folks revere some old ballparks and sports arenas, few venues are exempt from the fickleness of the sports business. Indeed, part of sports is remembering through the misty haze of nostalgia great moments that occurred in stadiums that no longer exist. Athletics is, after all, youth-oriented, a profession in which anyone over 30 is over the hill. Few active athletes ever become eligible for preservation, at least without the help of illegal performance enhancers.
In Seattle, tearing down stadiums is almost a tradition in itself, as the demolition of the Kingdome, Sick's Stadium and the proposed razing of Seattle Center's Memorial Stadium attest.
In Portland, there's also an arena controversy. Earlier this year, the city was actively considering tearing down the Rose Quarter's Memorial Coliseum, former home of the Portland Trailblazers and venue for rock concerts from Elvis and the Beatles to the Grateful Dead. The Coliseum is unusual, an International Style modern glass box, designed by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill in the late 1950s, and opened in the early '60s. It is notable for being, effectively, "transparent," and offering great views. It was an engineering feat in its time.
The site, however, has been eyed for a possible new AAA ballpark for the Portland Beavers baseball team and the city would like to see the Rose District rejuvenated. Critics say the existing facility is under-utilized. But preservationists stepped in, concerned that the structure wasn't being given its due. To stop the redevelopment-by-demolition momentum, Portland architect Peter Meijer entered the fray and put together a nomination to add the Coliseum to the National Register of Historic Places.
Such designations can't always protect structures from demolition, but they can shift momentum. Recent successful nominations of two mid-20th Century modern buildings on the University of Washington campus in Seattle, the Nuclear Reactor Building and the Paul Hayden Kirk- and Victor Steinbrueck-designed Faculty Club, were motivated in part by concerns over the future of the structures.
National Register status can swing the moral high ground to preservation over the wrecking ball. "The rationale behind the nomination is that the city of Portland lacks any protective measures for historic buildings unless a building is on the national register," Meijer told the Portland Tribune last summer. A National Register designation can also open up financial incentives for renovation. As a result of Meijer's efforts, the Coliseum was successfully added to the National Register last September.
The question is: what's next? The Portland Business Journal reports that this week is the deadline for groups to submit to the city concepts for reinventing the Coliseum. A committee plans to make recommendations to the mayor later this year. These concepts include a $150 million plan by the Veterans Memorial Arts and Athletic Center Group. According to the Journal, the Coliseum would be renovated into a mixed entertainment and athletic facility featuring "a pool, music rehearsal spaces, performance spaces, a gallery, bar, catering facilities, a jazz club and educational facilities as well as a multimedia center."
On the other extreme, consider the city of Irving, Texas, home of legendary Texas Stadium where the Dallas Cowboys played for so many years. The city is moving ahead with stadium's demolition, and according to Advertising Age, they've even found a sponsor for it. Yes, the blowing up of Texas Stadium will be brought to you by Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, which is paying $150,000 to re-brand the demolition as "the Cheddar Explosion."
Everyone is cognizant of the importance of the occasion. Says the city's mayor, Herbert Gears: "We're very proud to form a partnership with such a widely recognized and appreciated brand. We wanted to make sure that the world got to experience the demolition of such a historic facility." (Italics are mine.)
Yes, in some places historic demolition is a money-making spectator sport. Let's hope no one in Portland mentions this to Tillamook.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!











Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Thu, Jan 7, 12:57 p.m. Inappropriate
It's depressing to see the preservation movement move toward preserving ugly mid-century crap.
Posted Thu, Jan 7, 2:28 p.m. Inappropriate
Funny, that's exactly what people said when the preservation movement preserved Seattle's "crappy" Pike Place Market and Pioneer Square.
Posted Thu, Jan 7, 6:48 p.m. Inappropriate
Those were quality buildings. Maybe I should have said "poorly built midcentury crap".
There was a brief moment (40s to 70s maybe, my dates are off) when modern design was generally considered superior to traditional forms. Before that and since, buildings with traditional styles have been more respected.
Posted Thu, Jan 7, 6:52 p.m. Inappropriate
Regarding the Market, that was about business leaders going against what turned out to be popular will.
The AIA did a poll of popular option a couple years ago. Turns out people like historic brick and terra cotta more than even "trophy" modern such as Mies' most prized Chicago towers by a huge margin. The AIA and its members simultaneously avoided discussion of its results and argued the results away with points such as "buildings from the 50s and 60s haven't had time to become loved" (in so many words).
Posted Thu, Jan 7, 10:08 p.m. Inappropriate
Knute, thanks for another fine piece on the value of preserving Modern resources. SOM's Portland Coliseum is an architectural gem. The architecture and preservation communities in Portland pulled together in a short amount of time to save the Coliseum from demolition. Fortunately, the mayor and others heard the people and backed off from what would have been a shortsighted move to destroy history for a redevelopment project that was not well thought out. We hope as they go through the process of developing viable uses for the structure that proposals do not alter the interior significantly because it's just as important as the exterior.
The lack of appreciation or understanding of why we should care about Modern design is unfortunate. Hard to believe that both Victorian era architecture and the later Craftsman style architecture were considered "ugly" at one point. Of course, we all love bungalows now (even us Modernists). Appreciating good architecture and well-designed buildings isn't an either-or issue. It's not about liking styles from historical periods more than Modern architecture or vice-versa. Since 1998, Docomomo WEWA has been raising awareness and appreciation of Modern design in our region. We've seen first hand what advocacy and education can do to promote a not very "popular" period of architecture. Support for our efforts continues to grow and we are happy to see more people appreciate Modern design. Go Modern! www.docomomo-wewa.org
Posted Thu, Jan 7, 10:35 p.m. Inappropriate
While I tend to prefer older architecture, I also appreciate the historic and cultural value of architecture from other periods. But with due respect to Mr. Hays, his responses evoke Upton Sinclair's theorem that "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
Posted Thu, Jan 7, 11:31 p.m. Inappropriate
Since I work for a contractor that renovates buildings of all ages, your guess is incorrect.
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.