Century II is not worth saving
Do you save or raze Century II in downtown Wichita? Why save it?
It is not landmark architecture. It will never be on the National Register of Historic Places. I agree that it is a Wichita landmark, but how many buildings could be placed in that sentence? Raze the old, raise the new.
If Wichita can and probably would benefit from having a more modern and accommodating facility, why hesitate?
Never miss a local story.
Wichita has the new arena. What would it solve by trying to renovate an old building to function for new functions?
Does Wichita truly want to attract more conventions and visitors, or do the people of Wichita wish to remain mired in the mundane of outdated structures and lesser opportunities?
As one who has attended dozens if not hundreds of events at Century II, I would suggest Wichita bulldoze the building; build new, perhaps retaining a few of the cues from the old; and move forward. I see no value in holding onto something that is neither classic nor functional.
Follow the money
A news article (“Conventions consultant offers options for Century II,” Oct. 29 Eagle) and an editorial (“Bulldoze Century II?” Nov. 3 Eagle Editorial) both failed to mention that the convention business nationally has been in a decline for the past decade.
The question should not be whether we need a “new” convention center but rather: How do we find new services and uses for our existing megaplex in the heart of our community that happens to sit on prime real estate?
Yes, the location is the true issue here, and we all need to follow this discussion very closely. And follow the money.
Who in our leadership is most likely to profit from the demise of Century II?
And look not at just the person who vocalized the issue but at friends and business acquaintances. Remember the old saying, “Birds of a feather flock together.”
Is this just one more example of wasting our taxpayer dollars hiring an “outside” consultant?
JUDY L. YOUNG