That photo makes it all OK. 
Comforting to know Duluthians are already Upset about it.

Another sound investment by the city.

That is a great picture, hahahahaha!

Realistically, they are probably looking at early next year as the soonest they can come into compliance -- it's going to take some serious cash to get there. For those of you who were looking forward to the Great Lakes Underground Experimental Music Fest at the Norshor in October, we're probably looking at the fall of '11 for that.

What a nightmare. I hope the city is getting legal advice on this, and not just believing what Access North says. 

Welcome, angry special interest groups! Coming soon: historic preservationists stage a protest against the new, non-historic main floor bathroom that gets built to please the ADA-ers.

It's not about "pleasing" the ADA-ers. It's about complying with federal law. The city asked Northern Access to tour the place and give an opinion -- after all, they are the experts on ADA law. Northern Access told the city the hard facts -- as a unit of government, and now title-holder of the property, they are required to meet ADA. If you were disabled, perhaps you'd understand it's a civil rights issue, not NIMBY issue. I was planning on holding a music fest in October. I'm bummed, but I understand the issue at hand and whining isn't going to fix this. Money and support will fix this.

Well stated, Tony.

The building wasn't owned by the city and constant code violations were issues for former owners.

That building had no problem altering its historical preservation when they decided to do away with that balcony once reserved for non-whites.

So, just to be clear, because it's not properly accessible to a minority of people, the majority has to suffer?

Sorry, Paul--you did mention the historic district.

And it took me a while to notice, bit damn, Adam, that's some fine photoshop parody work right there, boy! You keep that right up!

There is no step-by-step manual on how to save a historic theater.  What makes the NorShor special, unique, and worth saving are the very things that make it challenging.  

It concerns me that folks proclaim defeat every time a problem comes up.  You know what?  There's going to be problems, lots of them - some big, some small.  This is a challenging project, but it's a project worth fighting for.  It's worth it to fix the problems rather than simply define the problems.  

We are going to make it accessible because it is the right thing to do.  It's been a serious problem with the theater for 60 years - and we're going to fix it.  The question now is, do we spend energy complaining about the problem and the inconvenience of the solution OR do we appreciate that this serious problem is finally going to be fixed?

Our goal is to fix all of the problems at the NorShor.  But it's not going to be easy and it's not going to happen tomorrow.  And fixing problems in a historic building requires very thoughtful solutions, it takes a commitment to do it right for the long-term.  

There's going to be no shortage of short-term criticism, there will be no shortage of folks saying "I told you so" based on something that everyone already knows, and the folks who are working the hardest to make this happen will be the targets of the criticism.  We KNOW this is going to happen, it's a given - I expect it for any worthwhile undertaking.  If you want to criticize someone for the existence of problems, that's part of my job description, so send them my way.

Hopefully there are more folks who want to see this project succeed and will both support the efforts to fix the place, but will also help keep things in perspective when the next problem comes to light.

Building codes and regulations are changing so rapidly that by the time a large scale project finally gets built it is already out of conformance with the current codes and regulations. Relatively new buildings, such as 20 year old  schools, stadiums and medical facilities to name a few, need significant upgrades if any remodeling is undertaken. It's a fact of life. It's part of the way our built environment has evolved. New or old we want to keep our buildings as safe as possible for the public. There will be challenges along the way. Attitudes for tearing down are often a waste of our limited resources. Every building embodies a precious amount of materials and energy. The greenest structure is one that was built to last. The Orpheum is one of those unique structures that can be upgraded and can last for years to come. It takes creative energy, teamwork and positive attitude.

Well...I'm willing to play for free if it'll help open the doors of that place a bit quicker. I don't recall the last time I was paid for a gig anyway.

Just think of the free publicity this company would get.  For that alone contractors should be fighting over this opportunity.

Mayor Ness:  I am one of those "I told you so" folks.  I still can't figure out why we are spending more time, energy and money on such an eyesore. Certainly the city has better things to do than police and pour money into run down buildings that should be bulldozed over. Anybody could take one look at the place and realize it is just a mess of trouble.  I think it is very much like the Bridge to Nowhere and I, for one, as a taxpayer, would love to see it gone. I am not happy that my tax dollars support such a poor investment.

Jude, it's all in the eye of the beholder, or a matter of perspective. You can't see the value in the 'Shor that others do. I look at that building and I see no eyesore, only potential and a lot of good things already in place. I see history, culture--things you can't hang a price tag on, or replace. Maybe those things aren't important to you, but they are to many others.

I also see economic potential beyond the NorShor. Restoring and successful operation of the NorShor could become the lynchpin to a revitalized "old downtown" and could encourage other building owners to restore their "blighted" buildings as well. With any luck, an active NorShor will help lure visitors out of Canal park and into downtown, to spread that wealth around.

What good would bulldozing that building do?  Would you really rather have an empty lot there? What modern building would fit in between the Temple Opera and the Hotel Duluth? (See, there's an entire district of historic buildings down there, not just the NorShor.) It's more expensive in dollars, materials, and waste to destroy one building to build another than it is to rehabilitate the older building. Please read Bob Hewitt's post for a much better reasoning than I have provided.

Bottom line: We're gonna disagree on what's an "eyesore" or a "historic treasure," so I urge you to try to think of it this way: The future proposed for the NorShor is not just about the NorShor: a lot of it is about the economic well-being of downtown Duluth and the merchants in that district.  And, as pointed out many times, it will take hard work and money. Please, try to have a little patience and optimism in the mean time.

I'm interested in how it's gonna work, not why some think it isnt! 

I remember helping carry Russ Stover (in a wheelchair) up to the balcony so he could watch a show, or was he IN the show? We've waited a long time to have this venue part of our community again and a little longer isnt going to hurt anyone. Let's do it right this time! The place has needed a 1st floor bathroom since day 1! What is the current thinking on where the 1st floor bathroom (and other required) ADA compliance items will be? How can we help?

Admackbar:  I love when people sing to me....thanks for that!

Why do we need this to be a "good guys/bad guys" thing? Are we so shallow as to REQUIRE blame for every situation? Crap happens and mistakes are made. Let's figure out the difference between fight and campaign.

Paul:  I never said that the place should be ignored, I suggested it should be bulldozed.  And yes, there are some nice looking places in that area, but there are certainly a good share of seedy places and overall when I am in that area the seedy side overrides the beauty of the rest.  

And yes, I am mad. And I mention again, the NorShor looks the worst of all, and I have yet to hear one solid thing that anybody in the city is doing to make it look better.  A lot of "wait and sees" but nothing in the way of a business plan that I have heard.  What did they do with all the money they collected from the $100 per person fundraiser?  Pay the insurance?  How much is the insurance per year?  I bet it is staggering. 

And the reason I am mad about it is because I am not very confident in how the city does business.  When a city this big has reduced hours for three libraries, for crying out loud, and then they expect us to believe that it is OK to invest in this white elephant, something is very wrong.

Barrett: That is a good point about seeing the inside of the building because I have not toured around inside.  I disliked the building for years because of the strip club and I wanted to wait for the place to be cleaned up before I ventured inside after the city bought it. Now it's closed. I am as sentimental about things as all of you who want the building saved, but before I set my heart on supporting something, I want to know it is not a Bridge to Nowhere. 

I am not hearing the city (even in Don's post, above) say they are definite about what will happen to it, only that it will take a long time and a lot of resources. If the city is serious about restoring it, then I would think they would honor those of you who have donated blood, sweat and tears (not to mention $$$) by taking a few hundred bucks to make a nice sign that says "Coming Soon, Your Lovely Old Historic Theater."  I only see a broken down marquee that looks sad and neglected. 

If the city brings forth a plan with dates and costs and deadlines and a clear statement of intent for the building's use, then I will take a closer look at how I feel about the renovation.