Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, April 23, 1994 TAG: 9404250157
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: By DWAYNE YANCEY STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
Today, the Hotel Roanoke. Tomorrow, Victory Stadium?
Now that the hotel's renovation is under way, the candidates for Roanoke City Council are talking about fixing up another sentimental landmark.
All seven candidates for the four council seats that will be voted on May 3 agree that "something" needs to be done about the 52-year-old stadium, which once hosted the state's most storied college football rivalry but now is notable mostly for its state of disrepair.
To five of those candidates, that "something" means fixing up the stadium.
Only Republican Barbara Duerk, who says it's important to keep an "open mind" about the stadium's possibilities, is willing to entertain suggestions that the city tear down the stadium and start anew.
And Democrat William White says he can't really comment on the stadium until he knows what the city manager thinks should be done about it.
The candidates may agree that Victory Stadium is becoming an eyesore, but they bring different levels of enthusiasm to the issue.
The candidates that show the most enthusiasm for fixing up Victory Stadium are Democrat Nelson Harris and Republican John Parrott, both of whom talk about making improvements in the near future. Harris, in fact, has centered his campaign on his call to include $1 million in stadium repairs in this November's bond issue.
The least enthusiastic? Republicans Duerk and John Voit, plus Democrats White, John Edwards and Lynda Wyatt.
But even they have different reasons for their low-key response.
Wyatt and Voit both say the stadium's just not a high priority with them.
"I can see fixing it up. It ought to be fixed up," Voit says. "But I haven't given a lot of thought to it. ... Certainly something ought to be done to it. It's getting in pretty ratty shape."
Edwards, meanwhile, has given thought to the stadium, but says he wants to "see more ideas" about the city's sports possibilities and to throw in some of his own.
Finally, Duerk and White say before they endorse improvements they first want to see the city administration conduct a formal study on the facility's future.
Even they disagree, though, on just why they want to see such a study.
Duerk talks enthusiastically about the possibility of building a baseball stadium near Interstate 581 and Williamson Road to house the Salem Buccaneers. She also touts the valley's tourism potential and says the city needs to conduct a more thorough study of what type of events it wants to attract - and where.
"The stadium needs to be addressed, but not by itself," she says. "Nothing is isolated."
White, by contrast, says the stadium must "wait in line" behind other construction projects. "My experience is not to get emotional," he says, pointing out that he has yet to see a public groundswell demanding stadium improvements.
"I've seen some individuals and people running for council talk about it," he says. Yet he concedes, "I do see the momentum building to discuss it."
One reason may be his ticket mate.
To some extent, Harris' emphasis on Victory Stadium is what finally brought it to the forefront as a campaign issue.
Harris ticks off three reasons the city should fix up the stadium:
Seating almost 25,000, it's the largest city-owned stadium in the state. Only Virginia Tech and the University of Virginia have bigger ones.
It's not just a sports facility, but also a cultural one. That's a view shared, by the way, by the stadium's officialdom. City Special Events Coordinator Laban Johnson says many events, such as the annual "Beach Party," have outgrown the Roanoke City Market and are being moved to the stadium.
If the stadium were improved, Harris says, more events could be held there, from bluegrass festivals to company picnics.
Finally, Harris points out, the stadium is "structurally sound," but cosmetically falling apart. "I've been to high school football games and seen kids pick up concrete and throw it at one another," he says.
Harris notes that in 1986, the city commissioned architects to draw up plans for $3 million worth of renovations, but those sketches since have done little except collect dust on the shelves.
"Victory Stadium needs a champion," Harris says, and that's what he says he'd be.
He's calling for the city to show its commitment to the stadium by including $1 million in a bond referendum for other construction projects this fall. That would be enough, he says, to renovate the crumbling steps, the aging seats and the notoriously bad restrooms and locker rooms.
It also, he says, would cover the cost of installing the base for a proposed "orchestral shell" that could be added in later years to attract concerts - and direct the sound away from nearby Roanoke Memorial Hospital and the South Roanoke neighborhood.
Harris says he's found voters enthusiastic about his call to refurbish Victory Stadium. "I think it's struck a resonant chord with some folks for lots of reasons," he says. "There's a nostalgic element to Victory Stadium," and the memories of the annual Thanksgiving football game between Virginia Tech and Virginia Military Institute.
Others, he says, are more intrigued about what events the stadium might be able to host in the future.
So what does Roanoke's "sports councilman" - who's not on the ballot this May - think about Harris' idea?
Not much.
"For him to use figures from seven to eight years ago is preposterous," Republican Mac McCadden says. "One million dollars still is not going to give us a chance to host a regional [college] football game. I'd say a minimum of $2 million."
He dismisses Harris' call to include $1 million in the bond issue as "political rhetoric" - and backs fellow Republican Duerk's call for a comprehensive study of the stadium's possibilities.
After all, one overlooked question is not just should the stadium be "fixed up," but what sports should it be fixed up for?
If the present football field is expanded to make room for soccer, as some suggest, there's no room left for a track that's up to collegiate standards, city officials say.
If the track is upgraded to the necessary eight lanes, then there's no room for a collegiate-size soccer field.
Either way, the present stadium can't accommodate a baseball diamond.
Harris favors the soccer configuration, saying track events should be directed to the city's two high schools.
Edwards, Parrott and Voit all express more interest in track - although Edwards has a pet project of his own. He says instead of emphasizing spectator events at the stadium, the city should push participatory sports.
Edwards, a track star in his high school days, says he'd like to see the city build a field house near the stadium to be "something for kids to do after school."
He's got no plans to show off but guesses "probably half a million to $1 million would get you a pretty good field house."
So far, others haven't embraced Edwards' field house plan, but there does appear to be broad acknowledgement that council must soon address the stadium.
"Something," Parrott says, "is going to be done with Victory Stadium before long."
But what that is may depend on who wins May 3.
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB