Roberts Stadium is too valuable for new use in regional exposition draws to tear down or not use. Also the Very nice new Ford arena is not set up or designed for exposition use. For instance it will have the same crappy problems for car shows that Roberts now has with the small hole space, and it has no outside demonstration spill over area.
Roberts should have its hole filled to the surface level creating a “large” multiuse facility surface for promotions, expositions and events that are limited only by imagination. Probably a lot of the existing seats could be traded for fill work. Probably some 10 or 20 rows of seats would remain back above the ground surface level. Expenses are greatly reduced by no need to pump the flood with the hole filled, and overall it would have a different barnlike expense character rather than that of a fancy show character.
It is critical that for that new use that it be put in the hands of a good solid promoter /manager (company or individual) — under lease or maybe by the city, but the skill sets to develop it and manage it manage it right and reach out to the region comes more from private enterprise. I can think of some of my former regional promotional radio managers who would be ideal types for this kind of project.
It should have an objective of being an attraction center for a hundred mile radius. Local restaurants and hotels would benefit as well as the shopping centers. The traffic load would be not a problem because the flow would be more continual that in big events like games where it has a 7PM arrival and a 9PM departure of thousands of cars.
There are not great alternative uses for that location by which the city could get rich by selling it. The city cannot get rich selling it for all the money it could get for a commercial development site. . It is not really an attractive potential residential development side. It’s only real use is ‘as is, modified’ or maybe a tear down and some kind of adjacent extension of Welshman park. For economic development it is outside the path of the Green River road market area
What Roberts is, is an ideal regional exposition center attraction with facility already in place and ample parking and access; and the parking already offers attractive and needed outside spill over areas for demonstrations, shows and trials that supplement the more stationary activities that would be contained inside.
If Roberts were torn down and then later the city decided it wanted an exposition center, it would cost the city then probably more than $80 Million to develop a new simple center. Now, with some relatively simple modification we already have it.
As an example the auto shows in Roberts have been cramped, with cars jammed on too small a floor or jammed on the walk around aisle, but at least there was adjacent outside spillover space. The new arena is going to offer no more floor space, still jammed and the upper corridors will be more difficult to access and place cars and would be jammed there too, and there is no adjacent outdoor space. Think in terms of auto shows, outdoor sport shows, Regional Agricultural Equipment shows, Big multiple flea markets, Equestrian or live stock events, G0-cart racing, indoor winter practice fields for preseason high school and college sports, industrial equipment shows, RV and trailer shows, gun and hunting shows, boat show s, etc, etc, [some of multiple kinds at the same time, given the above], as far as one’s imagination can reach.
$10 a head, by the visitors or by the sponsors , and if only 1,000 visitors a day and if in use only half the days of the year, that is gross revenues of $1,800,000 per year before concession stands and other specialized revenue; and probably a lot higher utilization than only 1,000 persons per event, per day. — for a facility that would be much less costly to operate than the present one.
Keep Roberts, Change it. Use it.
It would not compete with the Ford Arena.
Alan Brill
This makes more sense than the nautorium (sp?), which still makes more sense than tearing it down.
we need to have a city wide discussion and hear all the opinions before we choose to waste a resource like Robert’s Stadium. This is one very good idea
What a pity Weinzapfel did not feel the same way. Obviously he was not looking at the BIG picture when he crafted his arena plans.
__
Alan Brill of the bankrupt Brill Media offering the advice?
Didn’t Edison have some failures?
Thanks Alan for your comments, the Republican candidates for Council have spent a lot of time discussing the re-use of Roberts. Your concept is the position that I have championed. In a time of economic downturn and uncertain future economic growth, I believe we should be building infrastructure that enhances and supports the current workhorses of our local economy. Tool and Die, Plastics, Agriculture, Oil and Gas production and processing to name a few. Roberts offers a great location in our country, a central location in the tri-state and an easy to find location in our City . With a few modifications it could be the most efficient and easiest set-up and take down facility that vendors can find. I look forward to your participation in the public discussion about the future of Roberts Stadium after Nov 8.
Thanks Alan for your comments. I am one of the Republican candidates for City Council that Bgrafton mentioned and I have spent a lot of time discussing the re-use of Roberts Stadium. Your concept is one of the positions that I have championed.
Good idea, could be tried with less expense, before taking it down.
Comments are closed.