Jump to content

Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum


Recommended Posts

A book has been published that has a collection of before and after photos of the Los Angeles Coliseum being built back in 1923.  Kind of fascinating:

Los Angeles Coliseum Photo Essay

In other news it appears that the NFL will be back in the Coliseum with a new team sometime soom and the long-awaited renovation to the building might happen sooner than later:

NFL's Only Choice May Come Down to the Coliseum

coluseum.jpgaerial.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd, if you have to decide, what would you prefer?

A third time Olympic Games in L.A. or the Olympic Games in Chicago for the first time?

By the way I love the Coliseum of Los Angeles - it is a wonderful mixture between old and new...

Oh definitely Chicago over L.A.  California has had the games 3 times and New York twice.  It's time for the games to go to a new frontier - Illinois!  :wwww:

Yea the model is great and gives the coliseum a much needed face lift, but I noticed the infield thing as well.  I wonder how much say the L.A. Olympic comittee will have with regards to creating an infield suitable for a future Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd, if you have to decide, what would you prefer?

A third time Olympic Games in L.A. or the Olympic Games in Chicago for the first time?

By the way I love the Coliseum of Los Angeles - it is a wonderful mixture between old and new...

Oh definitely Chicago over L.A.  California has had the games 3 times and New York twice.  It's time for the games to go to a new frontier - Illinois!  :wwww:

Yea the model is great and gives the coliseum a much needed face lift, but I noticed the infield thing as well.  I wonder how much say the L.A. Olympic comittee will have with regards to creating an infield suitable for a future Olympics.

Hi there...didn't hear from u re my last PM.

Anyway, I think that roof may never get built.  I just realized that it looks great on the model, but that whole thing is untested in an earthquake.  And all the computer simulations in the world will not give you the real probabilities.  It is just too massive a structure to be comfortable with.  No commission of the Coliseum will be able to afford the liability insurance premiums on that -- which is why I think the roof will never get built.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd, if you have to decide, what would you prefer?

A third time Olympic Games in L.A. or the Olympic Games in Chicago for the first time?

By the way I love the Coliseum of Los Angeles - it is a wonderful mixture between old and new...

Oh definitely Chicago over L.A.  California has had the games 3 times and New York twice.  It's time for the games to go to a new frontier - Illinois!  :wwww:

Yea the model is great and gives the coliseum a much needed face lift, but I noticed the infield thing as well.  I wonder how much say the L.A. Olympic comittee will have with regards to creating an infield suitable for a future Olympics.

Hi there...didn't hear from u re my last PM.

Anyway, I think that roof may never get built.  I just realized that it looks great on the model, but that whole thing is untested in an earthquake.  And all the computer simulations in the world will not give you the real probabilities.  It is just too massive a structure to be comfortable with.  No commission of the Coliseum will be able to afford the liability insurance premiums on that -- which is why I think the roof will never get built.

Oh geez - I didn't even know I had a PM.  I have my pop-up blocker on and for some reason it screws up letting me know I have PM's  :blush:

I'll e-mail you soon.

Meantime, you raise a point I never thought of in California - roofs over the stadiums in an earthquake zone.  Now that I think of it, LA, SF, Oakland, SD - non of them have roofs, do they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about San Diego, but none of them do.  And the more I thought about it, if you can't get reasonable earthquake insurance for your homes, how much more for a massive bldg holding 80-90,000 people?  Further, the Coliseum (and the Rose Bowl) are around 75 years old now; so they're probably NOT cost-effective to do those risky renovations.  (A small bit of Candlestick came off during the 1989 earthquake.)  Might as well tear them down and start from scratch.  

So, unless they post a $500 million bond or something like that, NO insurance company in the world will cover these make-shift roofs for CA stadia, no matter how pretty they are in the models.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd, if you have to decide, what would you prefer?

A third time Olympic Games in L.A. or the Olympic Games in Chicago for the first time?

By the way I love the Coliseum of Los Angeles - it is a wonderful mixture between old and new...

Oh definitely Chicago over L.A.  California has had the games 3 times and New York twice.  It's time for the games to go to a new frontier - Illinois!  :wwww:

Yea the model is great and gives the coliseum a much needed face lift, but I noticed the infield thing as well.  I wonder how much say the L.A. Olympic comittee will have with regards to creating an infield suitable for a future Olympics.

Hi there...didn't hear from u re my last PM.

Anyway, I think that roof may never get built.  I just realized that it looks great on the model, but that whole thing is untested in an earthquake.  And all the computer simulations in the world will not give you the real probabilities.  It is just too massive a structure to be comfortable with.  No commission of the Coliseum will be able to afford the liability insurance premiums on that -- which is why I think the roof will never get built.

You guys, an earthquake was the FIRST thing I thought of when I saw the canopy renderings for the Athens Olympic stadium.  And from what I read later, the canopy is built to withstand a major earthquake... so I'm PRETTY sure if this roof over the Coliseum were to be built, it would be built to current, if not better, California earthquake codes.

Also, I wish I could search for the site now (I'm kinda busy at work right now) but I read on the internet some years ago that if the L.A. Coliseum were to be renovated for an NFL team, it would also be renovated in a way that it could be converted to be used as the main stadium for another Olympics, including being able to host track-and-field events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, I'm sure the technology is there.  But the US being the most litigious society in the world...

#1 - is it cost effective to do some patch-up job?

#2 - will the (new) leaseholder of the Coliseum operations put on events under a new roof, w/o adequate insurance?  I'm sure their lawyers will tell them otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys, an earthquake was the FIRST thing I thought of when I saw the canopy renderings for the Athens Olympic stadium.  And from what I read later, the canopy is built to withstand a major earthquake... so I'm PRETTY sure if this roof over the Coliseum were to be built, it would be built to current, if not better, California earthquake codes.

#1 - I think Athens' "bowl" is much smaller than either of LA's stadia; so the arches (and they hold the Athenian roof in a more secure way) are sturdy enough.  

#2 - Athens is in a more northerly latitude, so the summer sun is A LOT hotter; so the roof was definitely a requisite to holding a 'comfortable' Olympics.  Events in LA can always be scheduled before noon or after 6:00 p.m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, I'm sure the technology is there.  But the US being the most litigious society in the world...

#1 - is it cost effective to do some patch-up job?

#2 - will the (new) leaseholder of the Coliseum operations put on events under a new roof, w/o adequate insurance?  I'm sure their lawyers will tell them otherwise.

The same can be said about ANY building in California; example, would it be bad to hold any event in the Staples Center because the owners would be liable if anyone is injured in an earthquake?  

The Coliseum renovation would be more than just a patch-up job.  While preserving the Coliseum's peristyle, the whole interior seating would be redone to more closely mimic seating for modern American football stadiums, plus the amenities that an NFL franchise would want.  Also, the ugly scoreboards would be removed, and the ugly fencing that currently surrounds the Coliseum would be removed as well.  The Coliseum could be the centerpiece for a revitalized and beautified Exposition Park.  

Don't get me wrong, I'm actually against Los Angeles getting an NFL team (NFL games tend to bring in a bad element) but if it were to get one, the Coliseum would be a good place for it.  Plus, the MTA has already approved the Exposition Light Rail Line which would run along Exposition Boulevard, between the USC campus and Exposition Park; and construction for that should start this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#2 - Athens is in a more northerly latitude, so the summer sun is A LOT hotter; so the roof was definitely a requisite to holding a 'comfortable' Olympics.  Events in LA can always be scheduled before noon or after 6:00 p.m.

Athens is no further north on the globe than San Francisco; and of course southern California is well-known for its Mediterranean climate.  I would think if anything, a more southerly latitude on the globe (closer to the equator) would mean more direct sun rays.  

I think a roof or canopy over the Coliseum would be a plus.  Again, I'm against L.A. getting an NFL team, and I really don't want the US to host another Olympics for another 50 years at least, but if L.A. could successfully host it in 1932 and 1984, I'm sure it could do it again in the not too distant future... but I'd rather it didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, LA will proceed with those renovations per the model?  I thought they had to wait for an NFL tenant?  Or are all the plans proceeding regardless of an NFL tenant (which doesn't make sense if it will see no regular use)?

ALso, the Staples Center was built using late 20th century engineering and construction technology  (as is PacBell Park in SF), taking a lot of seismology into account.  The Coliseum and the Rose Bowl were built in 1930; so I disagree with you.  There is no comparison in terms of the integrity of the structures.  And not unless they will probably redo the entire foundations of the Coliseum so that the new weight can counterbalance the pylons and what will be suspending the new roof.  If that's the case, then indeed it is do-able.  But not as a mere cosmetic add-on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, LA will proceed with those renovations per the model?  I thought they had to wait for an NFL tenant?  Or are all the plans proceeding regardless of an NFL tenant (which doesn't make sense if it will see no regular use)?

ALso, the Staples Center was built using late 20th century engineering and construction technology  (as is PacBell Park in SF), taking a lot of seismology into account.  The Coliseum and the Rose Bowl were built in 1930; so I disagree with you.  There is no comparison in terms of the integrity of the structures.  And not unless they will probably redo the entire foundations of the Coliseum so that the new weight can counterbalance the pylons and what will be suspending the new roof.  If that's the case, then indeed it is do-able.  But not as a mere cosmetic add-on.

My understanding is that the renovations will happen if the Coliseum is secured as the venue for an NFL team.  Like I said, IF L.A. does get an NFL team and the Coliseum becomes its home stadium, then I'd like to see it refurbished, as the model in this thread illustrates, or in any other way that would preserve its historical elements, upgrade it seismically and incorporate the contemporary amenities that a new NFL stadium would "require."

Retrofitting older buildings to withstand major earthquakes can be done and have been done successfully, for many years now.  The city halls of Los Angeles and San Francisco have been retrofitted and reinforced with base isolators to withstand major earthquakes; currently Pasadena's city hall is closed for earthquake retrofitting and will reopen some time next year, I think.  There are plans to renovate, restore and seismically upgrade the Rose Bowl.

The Coliseum suffered some damage during the 1994 Northridge earthquake and has since been retrofitted for earthquakes.  If the Coliseum is chosen for an NFL franchise, then I'm sure it would be further upgraded to withstand a major earthquake, if its current seismic upgrades are not already up to the latest earthquake codes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, LA will proceed with those renovations per the model?  I thought they had to wait for an NFL tenant?  Or are all the plans proceeding regardless of an NFL tenant (which doesn't make sense if it will see no regular use)?

ALso, the Staples Center was built using late 20th century engineering and construction technology  (as is PacBell Park in SF), taking a lot of seismology into account.  The Coliseum and the Rose Bowl were built in 1930; so I disagree with you.  There is no comparison in terms of the integrity of the structures.  And not unless they will probably redo the entire foundations of the Coliseum so that the new weight can counterbalance the pylons and what will be suspending the new roof.  If that's the case, then indeed it is do-able.  But not as a mere cosmetic add-on.

My understanding is that the renovations will happen if the Coliseum is secured as the venue for an NFL team.  Like I said, IF L.A. does get an NFL team and the Coliseum becomes its home stadium, then I'd like to see it refurbished, as the model in this thread illustrates, or in any other way that would preserve its historical elements, upgrade it seismically and incorporate the contemporary amenities that a new NFL stadium would "require."

Retrofitting older buildings to withstand major earthquakes can be done and have been done successfully, for many years now.  The city halls of Los Angeles and San Francisco have been retrofitted and reinforced with base isolators to withstand major earthquakes; currently Pasadena's city hall is closed for earthquake retrofitting and will reopen some time next year, I think.  There are plans to renovate, restore and seismically upgrade the Rose Bowl.

The Coliseum suffered some damage during the 1994 Northridge earthquake and has since been retrofitted for earthquakes.  If the Coliseum is chosen for an NFL franchise, then I'm sure it would be further upgraded to withstand a major earthquake, if its current seismic upgrades are not already up to the latest earthquake codes.

If anything, L.A. should go ahead and renovate it just to get rid of those ugly-assed scoreboards and restore the historical elements.  Just my humble opinion.

Ejay - when the peristyle cracked and the cauldron fell off after Northridge, was that a patch job or did they seismically retrofit the whole thing?

The Coliseum and Rose Bowl can be retrofitted to 21st century standards.  When I bought my house (built in '27) it came with an estimate as to what it would take to seismically retrofit it ($10k!  :shocked: )  So I assume the same can be done for major stadia?  But there is still the liability issue . . .

The more I look at the roofs in the model, they appeared cantilevered, ala Golden Gate Bridge, etc.  So probably built to withstand a major trembler?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Athens is no further north on the globe than San Francisco; and of course southern California is well-known for its Mediterranean climate.  I would think if anything, a more southerly latitude on the globe (closer to the equator) would mean more direct sun rays.  

yeah, but SF summers are colder than most.  You bake in Rome, Madrid, Athens in the summer.  On the contrary, in the summer months, the more northerly you are, the warmer it is.  

I think a roof or canopy over the Coliseum would be a plus.  Again, I'm against L.A. getting an NFL team, and I really don't want the US to host another Olympics for another 50 years at least, but if L.A. could successfully host it in 1932 and 1984, I'm sure it could do it again in the not too distant future... but I'd rather it didn't.

You seem quite self-contradictory, ejay.  You'd rather not have an NFL team, nor another Olympics.  But you seem to be hep on seeing an upgraded Coliseum?   :suspect:  Doesn't compute.  Ain't gonna happen without one or the other happening to cause the whole re-do for the facility.    :hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

??? Well duhh!

Build a new Olympic stadium!

London's doing it over the natural choice, Wembley.

And did anyone ever think that Athens would use the 1896 stadium as the main stadium?!

LA isn't broke, build one in Pasadena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If London had put a track in at Wembley, the remaining capacity would be too small for IOC requirements at around 68,000.

But more importantly than that, if the bid team had decided to have the main stadium at Wembley, they would, for me, lose a major part of what this bid was about - namely regeneration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...