Intersting info in the report re. market studies for concerts, sports, other events.

Replacing the Coliseum with a 10,000 seat state of the art arena could be a pretty big deal.

The Auditorium seems to be doing well, comparitively and all things considered. Sounds like it could do better with some modest updates.

The report also notes that new facilities don't necessarily need to be in the current location or even adjacent in new locations, which is more typical.

I vote for a new arena and update of the Auditorim, keeping both at the current site.

I'm glad this is being addressed. Too bad it was allowed to get in this condition. I'm also glad they are waiting and holding the meeting in mid-January. This is a huge decision and a lot of people have other things on their minds right now.

That's quite a price range.

I have some great memories in both... Lyle Lovett, Stomp, and Nutcracker in the auditorium, and hockey, Disney on Ice, and Globetrotters in the Coliseum. I personally also like the distinctive style of the buildings, and if just the facades, roofs and promenades where repaired, cleaned and spruced up with new landscaping (plus all the interior improvements needed), they would look great on the skyline.

But I also understand that the ROI of renovation doesn't always work. And I definitely like some aspects of the ULI idea to completely raze that area and start over. Maybe the compromise is keeping the auditorium and replace the coliseum with a new stadium, but I'm not sure that's the only need...

The area needs to be animated, and not just when events are scheduled. Downtown has developed to the point, and the apartment community ringing this site has sprung up to the point, where you could really make this area a nexus of activity with mixed use facilities and community buildings alike. Take the entire area between E Summit Hill and the river, and E Hill and James White, and reimagine it. Relocate the municipal police/court facility to open it to development (or keep a smaller neighborhood facility) , maybe keep the auditorium and build a new stadium, but ring them both with some form of retail, restaurant, services, fountains, interactive exhibits. Add greenways through town view and this area, strengthen pedestrian connections to downtown, waterfront greenways, Volunteer landing, the Marriott and the adjacent apartments. Throw in a small outdoor amphitheater to compliment the other performance venues, but one that works as a public park when not used for performances. Rethink the parking structures... either bury them, ring them with more pleasant pedestrian experience, and build atop them. I also heard an interesting idea from a friend... move the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame to campus, right near the Summit statue and arena, and turn the current facility into a new facility for The Muse kid's discovery museum.

I know this is a big hairy, expensive idea, but this is really prime property for Knoxville's city center, and incremental improvements to facilities is unlikely to have an impact except for the events themselves. I'd be willing to bet that returning a good bit of public property in this area to the tax rolls would offset the much of the infrastructure costs. And taxes from new development would be a boon. I'd rather see the city open this area to an RFP for a master plan and developer than just consider the two performance venues.

Retain some greenspace
Unique design for the new building
Make one or more of the parking garages taller so don't need so much land for parking

Save the World's Fair park grounds and hand the Autitorium over to UT so they can have their new Clearence Brown.

As for the Coleseum, don't renovate to the point the costs exceed what current users can afford. Would the Ice Bears and Ringling be hurt if they had to charge double their ticket price to cover their cost?

I think so, and likely to the point they'd look elsewhere.

I can strongly recommend that interested parties download the study PDF and at least skim through it. The three categories of treatment are fully described and there are renderings to illustrate what the (B) option (demolish the coliseum part and rebuild a new arena adjacent; retain but renovate the auditorium) might look like and how it would open up the space to more efficient use.

I was particularly interested in the study group's reflection that the 1960's hope that the City would grow around the "Civic Center" never even remotely happened, that it remains apart from downtown proper, even though it is in reality just a short distance. The reasons that the growth didn't happen seem obvious today. The suggestion seems to be that taking steps to integrate the complex into downtown is essential.

Although the study indicates that the seating capacity (2500) of the auditorium is needed, it does not go into details about the degree to which the auditorium should be renovated. My feeling is: substantially, if not completely. There are real reasons no one wants to book it in 2015.

Two of the possible obstacles that the City will encounter in a redo is the nostalgia that some Knoxvillians of a boomer age have for the building and the natural fondness for the original Knoxville architect, the late Bruce McCarty. Unfortunately, both the auditorium and coliseum had interior design and construction issues that limited them from the beginning.

The coliseum issues are really obvious: it is undersized, both floor and seating, too spartan by modern standards of audience amenities, and it does not have the technical capabilities needed to handle today's arena shows. No renovation will ever be able to overcome these issues, particularly the size.

The auditorium, doomed by the requirement of too many municipal needs and probably not having the benefit of good theater design consultants, was wrong from the start no matter the perspective.
--The interior design, bland even by 1960 standards, looks merely like a scaled-up version of post-war high school auditorium design. The shape and volume of the interior overwhelms with its scale, no matter the usage. The natural acoustics were, and are, horrible, discouraging uses like theater, opera, and symphony orchestra, unless those organizations give in to extensive amplification and reinforcement which may not be appropriate.
--As sound and stage lighting technology changed over time, the building forced odd and uncomfortable adaptations. When professional usage of the auditorium inevitably declined, the stage rigging began to have maintenance issues which persist and have gotten worse. (everything audibly creaks)
--The lobby area is large but is inconveniently laid out. Concessions and restrooms are woefully inadequate for that capacity.

I admit that the auditorium's location (and parking capability) is probably the best downtown has to offer and a total interior re-design and re-build could solve the theatrical and audience issues. On initial glance, it appears that the #2 option (a new re-located arena; renovated auditorium) would serve Knoxville the best. I'd also like to see the auditorium get a name change--there was nothing particularly "civic" in how that land was acquired or used.

The KNS has a pretty good editorial today in favor of renovating the Auditorium and replacing the Coliseum.

I didn't get this part, though:

"According to the consultants' market analysis, replacing one or both of the primary venues would nearly double usage after four years. A new arena could absorb some local-interest events from the Convention Center, freeing up days at that facility for events that bring in out-of-town visitors who would spend money at area hotels, restaurants and retail shops."

I guess they are talking about the home show, car show, and Women's Expo?

Anyway, I don't think scheduling conflicts are the problem with utilization of the Convention Center.

Editorial: City must invest wisely in future of civic venues

Could demolish and not replace. The question is: how valuable is a minor league hockey team to life in the city. It means a lot to fans of the team, but nothing to the rest of us. Subsidizing the team by building them a new stadium seems wasteful.

Events other than hockey can go to Thompson Boling.

“The Greenest Building is the One Already Built.”
-Attributed to architect Carl Elefante

On a local, regional, national, and global level, the word “green” is becoming synonymous with a thoughtful approach to our everyday decisions and how they may impact our community, our environment, and our economy. Historic preservation is an inherently green action for its sustainable approach to community reinvestment and construction.

The report finds exactly what City Hall directed CS&L to find.

Mistakes, over-sites, and sloppy research permeate this report. It is farce.

As fiction the report is super reading. As helpful direction on wise policy development--not so much.