ABSTRACT
In the late 1960s civic leaders in Cleveland, Ohio, turned their attention to sporting space to achieve renewal. Amid rising unemployment, political fighting, increased crime, under-funded educational systems, racial tensions and an increasingly abandoned downtown, they argued that new sports facilities would entice people back and help revive the city’s economy and image. It was not to be, however. The Luckman Plan’s feasibility study (1969–70), which proposed several domed stadium designs for Cleveland, concluded that the city could not afford to either build anew or renovate the existing stadium. That news came directly from the prestigious architectural group of Charles Luckman & Associates, the firm that had most recently won acclaim for the design of New York City’s new version of Madison Square Garden. [ 1 ] Luckman & Associates’ conclusion was a harsh reality check for a city fascinated by big dreams but haunted by bigger problems.
