The Abandoned Astrodome And Its Future

[Guest Jackwood]

That looks cool. VOTE YES!

[Blue Dogs]

My money is on the Dome being TORN DOWN once voters overwhelmingly reject this so-called tax hike in order to "save the Dome".

 

 

[Houston19514]

Reliant Park already competes, to a certain extent, with the GRB.  The renovation of the Dome will not change that in any significant way.  Events that will most likely use the Dome facilities would not be able to use the GRB (such as OTC, the Rodeo...).

 

We are a HUGE city.  We can handle more than one major convention facility.  And no one will have a facility anything quite like the Dome.

[Urbannizer]

[lockmat]

Is the $8/yr figure true?

If so, will you be voting yes or no to preserve it?

[samagon]

Is the $8/yr figure true?

If so, will you be voting yes or no to preserve it?

True or not, and despite the hamfisted way they did this I'll vote yes, I don't like the idea of possibly losing the dome.

[Mab]

I go to college at Texas State University at San Marcos and I am planning to come home the last week of October for early voting to vote Yes for the New Dome Experience. Even thought I am only 19 I always loved the dome and it would be a sad tragedy if we basically tear down are greatest landmark in this city. I think $8 is not a horrible price to save the Eight Wonder of the World. 

[OkieEric]

Not a native Houstonian but I've been here over 10 years and never had a chance to set foot in the place...but I will still vote yes.  It's one of the few identifiable landmarks (perhaps the most identifiable) people outside of this city associate with Houston.  The idea of replacing it with yet another parking lot in that fugly, probably-visible-from-space barren wasteland of parking will just further limit any chance of redevelopment in that part of town.  They're already expanding parking to the former Astroworld site, where does it end?

 

I'd love an indoor amusement park - like a scaled down Ferrari World - but I'm guessing the economics are just a bust

 

Really curious to see if we will get any polling numbers on this before the vote.  For instance, would renters be more inclined to vote yes since the impact to them is less direct?  Have there been any similar votes (small $/yr on property tax) votes in the past?

[Subdude]

No.  No no no no no. 

 

We don't need the county to be wasting taxpayer money on vanity projects that are competing with the taxpayer-funded GRB downtown, which has a better infrastructure anyway. 

 

Does anyone really think "The New Dome Experience" would actually be successful?  Seems like a hail Mary pass to me.

 

 

[Houston19514]

No.  No no no no no. 

 

We don't need the county to be wasting taxpayer money on vanity projects that are competing with the taxpayer-funded GRB downtown, which has a better infrastructure anyway. 

 

Does anyone really think "The New Dome Experience" would actually be successful?  Seems like a hail Mary pass to me.

 

Well, there's a surprise. 

 

The GRB cannot and will not host the types of events that will be able to be hosted by the Dome.  For starters, and immediately upon completion, it will be used by the OTC and the Rodeo.  That books it for probably 6 weeks a year without even trying. 

 

With naysaying, persistently negative attitudes like Subdude's, we would have never built the Dome in the first place.

[Slick Vik]

No.  No no no no no. 

 

We don't need the county to be wasting taxpayer money on vanity projects that are competing with the taxpayer-funded GRB downtown, which has a better infrastructure anyway. 

 

Does anyone really think "The New Dome Experience" would actually be successful?  Seems like a hail Mary pass to me.

 

It's only $8

[Guest Jackwood]

YES! YES!! YES!!!

 

Let them tear down the GRB if they have to. We are talking about Houston's only iconic and most internationally known structure. I don't care how much it cost the taxpayers. $8 more in taxes per year is NOTHING! The Astrodome is IRREPLACEABLE! Conventions centers come and go. Convention goers come and go. Money comes and go. Boomtowns come and go.

 

Buildings that change the coarse of history come around less than once in a lifetime and should be treasured and protected.

 

Houston can not lose the dome. 

Edited September 18, 2013 by Jackwood

[samagon]

Well, there's a surprise. 

 

The GRB cannot and will not host the types of events that will be able to be hosted by the Dome.  For starters, and immediately upon completion, it will be used by the OTC and the Rodeo.  That books it for probably 6 weeks a year without even trying. 

 

With naysaying, persistently negative attitudes like Subdude's, we would have never built the Dome in the first place.

 

Plus all the local stuff that happens down there anyway. random quincenera and bridal extravaganzas, home and garden shows, there so many local gun shows that can't be handled by GRB now anyway, so we can have 2 per weekend and still need more of them. 

[KinkaidAlum]

I hate that this is what it has come down to. So many great ideas and visionary projects but we're left with this choice.

 

That said, I am voting yes. I don't want to be 89 years old and my grandkids asking me why I voted to tear down the Dome. Sometimes you need to vote by what you think will be the right side of history. Plus, I will always hold out hope that as long as it is still standing, it COULD become something better.

Edited September 19, 2013 by KinkaidAlum

[crunchtastic]

So many of these comments follow the same trajectory: you're pissed that way it's been handled, you wanted so much more in terms of vision, and yet you shrug your shoulders and say "it's only  $8 dollars, and the Astrodome history blah blah ginger."  You're being played, exactly as they want. The plan is an affront to the architectural and social history of the dome. I'm tired of watching petty fiefdoms  squander our money and good intentions.

[Subdude]

 

It's only $8

 

That's exactly how they're selling it to you.  How much you wanna bet that they are understating the true cost?  Any takers?

 

 

The GRB cannot and will not host the types of events that will be able to be hosted by the Dome.  For starters, and immediately upon completion, it will be used by the OTC and the Rodeo.  That books it for probably 6 weeks a year without even trying.

 

But has the Reliant complex been losing business due to lack of a giant dome-like facility on the grounds?  Is the existing space insufficient, and they are just now figuring that out?  If a renovated Dome is such a swell idea, why are just now promoting it after 12-odd years of vacancy?  If this concept made a lick of sense do you not think some developer would have proposed it years ago? 

 

I'm not aware of a single case in which a sports stadium has been successfully re-purposed for other uses, and I've yet to hear of why this would be different.  It's simply throwing a lot of good money after bad for a County vanity project. 

 

If they were selling the proposal to strip the Dome down to its bones as sort of a giant park shelter I would have been 100% behind the idea.  But this is just an ill-thought out scam on taxpayers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[brian0123]

But has the Reliant complex been losing business due to lack of a giant dome-like facility on the grounds? 

 

No, but yes. I live in a neighborhood that I can walk to Reliant. My impression is that Reliant wants to bring bigger concerts/festivals of the multiple stage variety, but have had to spill over into the "Green Lot" for now since it's the only other option they have where you won't melt event-goers' shoes.

 

Even at the final four events w/ band like Kings of Leon... Discovery Green served as a so-so place for the large outdoor concerts... but the park was bursting at the seams, parking/getting in and out was horrible, and the lawn was pretty much mud afterwards.

 

I'll say it again, but my belief is that officials think casino gambling is close to passing here in Texas. I think officials are trying to save the Dome that would make it usable for this purpose in the future (hence no indoor ski-slopes/stripping the thing down/etc. but just preserving the shell and making it a large indoor space). Ed Emmett has even said that the dome will be saved so that future "proposals" can be easily implemented when that day comes.

Edited September 19, 2013 by brian0123

[Guest Jackwood]

If you think that this plan is an affront to the history or legacy of the dome, bulldozing it and turning it into just another parking lot is just about the biggest f/u anyone could ever do to it or to Houston. At least the structure and cool ceiling (see my avatar) is saved in all it's mid-century modern glory.

 

The dome must be saved. This plan may not be the best use for it, and $8 could very well turn into $9, but at least it saves the Astrodome for another day when someone might come up with a better use for it. This plan would include removing the seats and gutting the inside. By getting the bulk of the remodeling out of the way now for this plan (which might actually work - we won't know until we know), it might make a future use that no one has thought of yet easier for a developer to make lucrative.

 

Seems to me people are getting all caught up in the politics of how this current plan has come to fruition, but I don't see this as a political issue at all. It is strictly about saving Houston's only world recognizable landmark. I don't care who makes a profit or frankly even if it loses money. This is about civic pride and a one time chance to keep alive the most famous standing icon that makes Houston special. 

 

[Houston19514]

 

I'm not aware of a single case in which a sports stadium has been successfully re-purposed for other uses, and I've yet to hear of why this would be different.  It's simply throwing a lot of good money after bad for a County vanity project. 

 

Just like there was not a singe case in which an enclosed air conditioned baseball/football stadium had ever been done, prior to the Astrodome.    Just because it's never been done, does not mean it cannot be done.

[Houston19514]

 

But has the Reliant complex been losing business due to lack of a giant dome-like facility on the grounds?  Is the existing space insufficient, and they are just now figuring that out?  If a renovated Dome is such a swell idea, why are just now promoting it after 12-odd years of vacancy?  If this concept made a lick of sense do you not think some developer would have proposed it years ago? 

 

 

Losing buiness?   Perhaps not.   But it is a fact that the OTC is short on space and will use the Dome.  It is a fact that the Rodeo is short on space and will use the Dome.   Further, this will give us a facility unlike any other for enticing more major events.  It will make Reliant Park much more attractive for future Super Bowls and Final Fours and other such events.

Edited September 19, 2013 by Houston19514

[luciaphile]

If they were selling the proposal to strip the Dome down to its bones as sort of a giant park shelter I would have been 100% behind the idea.  But this is just an ill-thought out scam on taxpayers.

 

I agree in preferring a use for the dome that would have respected its place in some people's hearts, but that would have reckoned with the mostly gaping hole in the city's fabric that it created even when it was an active sports stadium.

Houston has already enticed the Super Bowl.

I hope I'm not shrewishly anti-football, but tying the facility to hopes of being noticed again by the NFL seems well short of visionary. In any case, it seems possible that football is facing the sort of crisis baseball did in the nineties.

{No need to get indignant - no, I don't know anything about football, so just ignore the previous statement if it was outlandish.}

I thought the predominant sentiment amongst HAIF-ers was that Houston should focus on its residents, not on trying to lure out-of-towners and tourist dollars you have the great good fortune not to need.

No doubt some of you would enjoy attending a Really Major Sports Event once in a great while.  I understand that.

But as an ousider the one thing I have observed to unite the disparate voices on this forum is your shared approval for the Discovery Green, a place I found ... well, nevermind that. To each his own. The point is you really like it, and it can't help but prompt the thought that y'all are missing an opportunity to have a Discovery Green-type thing on a bigger scale, something that might please the most people, more of the time.

ETA: maybe it's the wrong place for it - I readily concede my ignorance there, and of course my built-in bias that there can be no wrong place for open space.

 

Edited September 19, 2013 by luciaphile

[infinite_jim]

Let's be honest with ourselves here.. The dome is getting demo'd.

 

I used to care about what would happen to the Astrodome but over the course of the last decade I've just lost faith in the Harris County public at large as represented by our elected officials and it's handling since the Astros left. I think nothing more of the engineering feat of the Astrodome now as I would the high art-deco interior detailing of the Houston Club bldg or the (about to be former) street window casements of the old Foley's.

 

The Astrodome reduced to a memory may be Houston's chance to reflect later on architecturally (like the downtown dome idea) as a much older city but for now let the nihilists have the day.

Edited September 20, 2013 by infinite_jim

[Guest Jackwood]

Are you drunk?

[Subdude]

 

I'll say it again, but my belief is that officials think casino gambling is close to passing here in Texas. I think officials are trying to save the Dome that would make it usable for this purpose in the future (hence no indoor ski-slopes/stripping the thing down/etc. but just preserving the shell and making it a large indoor space). Ed Emmett has even said that the dome will be saved so that future "proposals" can be easily implemented when that day comes.

 

I would be surprised if casino operators found that a vacant stadium was the optimal space for a casino.  For starters, casinos used closed ceilings to hold and hide the security and camera equipment, and they strongly prefer to have a hotel above or adjacent to keep the punters on the grounds. 

 

 

Just like there was not a singe case in which an enclosed air conditioned baseball/football stadium had ever been done, prior to the Astrodome.    Just because it's never been done, does not mean it cannot be done.

 

Perhaps not that it cannot be done, but that it has never once made any economic sense to do so. 

[Guest Jackwood]

Perhaps not that it cannot be done, but that it has never once made any economic sense to do so. 

 

You mean, has never made any economic sense to do so YET.

 

The Astrodome has a successful history of changing the rules of the game. Even the very idea for its creation probably didn't make a lot of sense to everyone at the time it was built either. It was an economic risk then. It is an economic risk now. You never get anywhere in life if you don't take a risk every once in a while.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Jackwood

[Houston19514]

 

 

Perhaps not that it cannot be done, but that it has never once made any economic sense to do so. 

 

Of course you are completely ignoring  the fact that there has never once been another facility quite like the Astrodome.  It's just a tad different from repurposing Texas Stadium or Mile High Stadium or Yankee Stadium.

 

(And you are also completely ignoring the successful repurposing of Compaq Center just up the road.)

Edited September 20, 2013 by Houston19514

[Houston19514]

You mean, has never made any economic sense to do so YET.

 

The Astrodome has a successful history of changing the rules of the game. Even the very idea for its creation probably didn't make a lot of sense to everyone at the time it was built either. It was an economic risk then. It is an economic risk now. You never get anywhere in life if you don't take a risk every once in a while.

 

That's exactly right.  I'm quite sure there were plenty of Subdudes around town in the early 60s proclaiming that we should not build the Astrodome because they were not aware of anyone ever having built an enclosed air conditioned baseball stadium and that it had never once made economic sense to do so.

 

Thank goodness the Subdudes of the 60s did not carry the day.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Houston19514

[infinite_jim]

Are you drunk?

Is it necessary for you to demonstrate your impotence in convincing anyone on this matter and therefore must resort to accusations against my judgement? Not a good look and it creates more divisiveness against the issue you support (politics 101).

This election is on 11/05/2013 and who votes in off year elections? Old people. Maybe former Judge Echols can actually rally the old-timers to vote for it but from everyone I know that lives out in the county, they are against it. In my experience it easier to convince old people to be against something than to be for something (just the times we live in). Rodeo people and Texans fans seem to against it from my informal polling. Who's for it? people who love architecture, people who don't see or don't mind the increase in property taxes, people who love the idea of Houston's modern past, young people (who notoriously don't show up to vote), etc. I'd optimistically guess the dome's odds of survival are roughly 1 in 10. Even if it does survive, this plan is pretty expensive for what we're getting, and very hard to determine whether it will be a success or just another example of a decades long pattern of local gov't boondoggles. Even people who love architecture on this very forum have gotten the "give-a-crap" beaten out of them over the last decade by the shifting quicksands that is our elected reps decision making process.

It's too bad that even if the Dome gets demo'd the taxpayers still have to cover that cost and the bundled debt of the 1986 renovations. Personally, I'd prefer door number#3, do nothing and just maintain. It was obvious that with hostile existing tenants that no private redevelopment was going to occur. If we wait we can force them to renegotiate their contracts, perhaps even punitively against their former actions. The People would then have the opportunity to be able to force the Texans and the Rodeo to accommodate their desire towards redeveloping the dome through a private developer or if that fails then to hold an open and public international design competition with at least one year's time frame to hold the contest. The issue has always been about accountability and transparency in the process, which we do not have on a county level of governance here in Texas.

Edited September 20, 2013 by infinite_jim

[Houston19514]

. Even if it does survive, this plan is pretty expensive for what we're getting,

 

How so?  For an investment of approximately $195 Million (in fairness, less than that, because if we don't do this project we still have to either continue to spend a couple million per year to maintain it or spend tens of millions to demolish it, but let's just go with the $195 Million figure), we get a 355,000 square foot multi-purpose convention/trade show/sports/gathering space facility unlike any other in the world.

 

For comparison:

 

--Nashville recently spent $623 Million to build the 350,000 square foot Music City Center, which is a relatively run-of-the mill convention center.

 

--Oklahoma City is working on a new convention center (again, a relatively run-of-the-mill facility, on which they plan to spend $250 Million for around 250,000 square feet of exhibit  and meeting space.

 

-- 5 years ago, Raleigh NC spent $221 Million on a run-of-the-mill convention center with approximately 190,000 square feet of exhibit and meeting space.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Houston19514

[crunchtastic]

The dome will be toast, and rightly so given the poor option the county is attempting to cram down our throats with its craven tactics. We'll have to schedule our next HAIF Happy Hour for the friday after the election. I'll gladly stand a drink to any HAIFer who wants to wager the dome lives.

 

The most ridic idea yet is that we should pay for this because of possible future casino gambling. What, so we can maybe in the future give Tillman Fertitta another incentive? The vote is not merely to rehab the dome. It is for a  potentially endless succession of taxpayer-funded handouts to future tenants....after the initial costs. This is what you will be voting for, not 'just' $8.  Hell, if the point is mass- commerical enterprise, we could turn it into a flea market today for a lot less than $200M. Traders Village is so inconvenient to get to, after all.

Or how about the awesome  comparison to 'repurposing'  the Compaq Center. How well, exactly, did we  make out on that sweetheart deal to Lakewood after all the sunk costs?