National Trust For Historic Preservation urges City Council to preserve Memorial Coliseum

Those seeking to preserve Memorial Coliseum just got an assist from the nation's largest nonprofit historic preservation organization: The National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Below is a letter sent to City Council members today from Althea Hartig, Ph.D., Director of the Trust's western region and Brian Turner, Law Fellow for the Trust.

Dear Mayor Adams:

On behalf of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, we are writing to express our support for the preservation of Portland’s Memorial Coliseum. We were alarmed to learn of your proposal to demolish this architecturally-significant modernist building and brazen pledge to seek City Council approval for demolition within a month. As detailed below, the unique qualities of this structure and its importance to the community require a careful evaluation of alternatives before demolition is considered. We are also highly skeptical of claims that the demolition of this Portland landmark is a “sustainable” solution. In fact, demolition followed by new construction would be a dramatic step backward in Portland’s goal of becoming the world’s most sustainable city.

The Memorial Coliseum is an historic building that contributes significantly to the community of Portland and the State of Oregon. Designed 1958-1960 by the firm of Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (established in 1936 in Chicago), the Coliseum is architecturally notable for its cantilevered steel-truss roof floating over a free-standing concrete arena bowl, the whole enclosed by a glass curtain wall. An all-glass exterior façade is an uncommon treatment for arenas of this era. The rarity of this style contributes to structure’s historic significance.

In 1961, the building won an Honor Award from the Oregon chapter of the American Institute of Architects and is currently listed on the City of Portland’s Historic Resource Inventory as a “Rank 1” structure. A Rank 1 rating distinguishes Memorial Coliseum as one of the most important historic properties in the City, distinguished by outstanding qualities of architecture, historical values, and integrity. Buildings with this ranking are the highest priority for landmark designation and eligible for National Register status.

The City of Portland has long been a patron of modern works and maintains an important collection of period resources, including Pietro Belluschi’s 1944-48 Equitable Building and 1951 Central Lutheran Church, as well as the 1966 Lovejoy Fountain Plaza by famed landscape architect Lawrence Halprin.  Memorial Coliseum is the result of both community effort–voters approved an $8 million bond in 1954 to finance the building–and the work of local building professionals, including the Portland-based Hoffmann Construction, a well-known company that has contributed substantially to the built environment in the northwest and is the recipient of more than a dozen architectural awards and commendations for its work in the City.

Preservation of Memorial Coliseum has received strong community support from a number of organizations, including Bosco-Milligan Foundation, AIA - Oregon/Portland Chapter, Recent Past Preservation Network, Docomomo WEWA, local Veterans groups,and a host of well-respected architects and designers. Brian Libby, a nationally published writer living in Portland, expressed “shock, sadness and anger” when he learned of the plan to “demolish one of the greatest works of architecture, and one of the most historic sites, in the entire City.”  This action, he asserts, “sends the worst kind of message about how the City respects its history and sustainability.”

With the successful reuse of this building, Portland can demonstrate its leadership in the preservation of historic architecture and work cooperatively towards developing a practical model for communities that are debating new uses for their aging arenas. In 2002, William P. Macht, an adjunct professor of urban planning and development in the College of Urban & Public Affairs at Portland State University, put forward four alternative plans for the preserved coliseum, created as part of a three-month development planning workshop. These particular options -- a headquarters hotel, an arts complex, a sustainable technology center and an urban home center –prove that alternatives do exist and should be more fully explored by the City before any further decisions are made.

Finally, we are concerned that the Mayor has supported demolition of the Coliseum under the mantra of “sustainability.” We question the accuracy of this assumption. Choosing new construction over reuse is rarely the most sustainable choice. New construction requires a massive expenditure of energy to manufacture or extract building materials, transport them to the construction site, and assemble them into a new building. A substantial amount of energy is already embodied in the Coliseum’s sizable steel and glass frames. The replacement of existing structural components with newly manufactured and newly extracted materials must be factored into the environmental cost if the City is to tout sustainability as an objective of this plan.

In light of community support and significant historic evidence, the National Trust asks that the reuse and renovation of Memorial Coliseum be the City’s first priority regarding the future of Rose Quarter area. The Trust also asks that the City consider the historic importance of the building relative to the rapidly diminishing number of significant modern works of architecture in the State and nationwide.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation was chartered by Congress in 1949 as a private nonprofit organization for the purpose of furthering the historic preservation policies of the United States and facilitating public participation in the preservation of our nation’s heritage. 16 U.S.C. § 468. With the support of our 235,000 members nationwide, including more than 2,200 members in Oregon, the National Trust works to protect significant historic sites and to advocate historic preservation as a fundamental value in programs and policies at all levels of government. The Trust has seven regional offices around the country, including a Western Office in San Francisco, California which is specifically responsive to preservation issues in Oregon.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important issue. Memorial Coliseum is an asset to Portland’s heritage and all effort should be made for its preservation. We hope that in light of these concerns your office will re-evaluate its preference for demolition and instead consider a full range of alternatives for adaptive reuse. If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

Anthea M. Hartig, PhD.

Brian Turner, Esq.

Comments

[Veronica]

Thanks for publishing this letter.

The third paragraph from the bottom (starting with "In light of community support") is a duplicate, just fyi.

[Laurence]

Agree with all the pleas for preserving the memorial Coliseum. But on another note, with the goal of further establishing Portland's civic foundations, is it really in the city's best interest to go the direction erecting sports arenas?

Granted, many cities in recent years have built expensive multi-arena sports districts right beside their downtowns as a way to apparently attract the masses and feed the nearby sports bars and other related businesses.

I would rather Portland grow in the direction of other great civic-minded cities with new art museums, history museums, botanical gardens, performance halls, etc. Sure, we have a sampling of each of these, but the most culturally enriching cities in America and around the world value their past civic institutions, but continually grow new ones as their cities grow in population and size.

[Greg]

I appreciate the appeals based on the unique architecture. I really do.

At the same time, the city has already spent over a decade trying to find a VIABLE alternative, and nothing has panned out (including the four proposals mentioned in this letter). In the meantime the building is literally falling apart and the city is racking up huge losses every year on this redundant facility.

And I like how people frame the sustainability argument in a way that meets their needs. What about the colossal waste of space and transportation infrastructure in the Rose Quarter? Doesn't it make far more sense to take a district that accomodates 10-20k short term visitors and restructure it for year round event use?

So while you are writing up your letters of protest to the city council, I would humbly request that you come up with a better alternative than "save the building because we're into sustainability, and forget the Portland Beavers".

[DC]

"Year round event use" will not be the result of another stadium that get used 40 days out of 365. Memorial Coliseum wiped out a vibrant entertainment neighborhood. Rose Quarter tried to create an entertainment district and failed (how many restaurants and clubs closed after the first year?). Now we're going to try again with a two week rush to approve the promises of an economic model based on the same principles of the past decade that find us with 12% unemployment.

[billb]

The Community Sports Center is a fine proposal for the building , that is quite poular with all I speak with. It is a 365 day a year use , and involves more folks than just the BBall fans , who will NOT be here 3/4 of the year.