Dome Roof: To Repair Or To Replace?

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The commission that oversees the Metrodome is getting ready to decide whether to replace its damaged roof entirely or just replace torn parts of it.

The Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission meets Thursday to hear from engineers who have been assessing the damage since the roof collapsed in a blizzard in December. Commission officials expect that insurance will cover most of the cost of replacing or repairing the roof.

A full replacement would likely take longer, with commission chairman Ted Mondale estimating a 5-6 month job. That could intrude on the NFL exhibition season beginning in August, though the Vikings might be able to use the University of Minnesota’s TCF Stadium as a backup.

The 2011 season is the last on the Vikings’ Metrodome lease, and team officials are seeking public financing for a replacement stadium.

(© Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

  • Common Sense up North

    Unless the Vikes are paying for it all. The state is trying to heal and then we have those people that want a new stadium.
    NO, NOT NOW.



  • Cindyloo

    I didn’t tear down my house and rebuild when I needed a new roof, get a grip on the financial reality and lets really decide what is needed and what we can afford. If the Vikes want a new stadium, let them finance it – most of us cannot even afford to go to a game and I dont’ see the existing structure or team making our state RICH!

  • Vikings Forever

    The Stadium is old, it is time to get a new one. Even with state funding, and the State “healing” this will bring jobs and boost the economy Especially around a new site location. The Vikings owner could move the team to states like California that are willing to build a new stadium. If the Vikings leave it will be because of that very topic and SOO many fans would be disappointed that the state didn’t back them to keep the tradition here in Minnesota.

    • M B

      “Just because fans would be disappointed” is a good excuse to spend ourselves into a hole? The Franchise can pay for itself. I’m tired of subsidizing rich people when I can’t even afford the cost of nosebleed seats because the tickets are so high. Do you think a new stadium funded by the state is going to drop those prices? Not bloody likely.

      This argument about jobs is total malarkey. All we do by making a new stadium is transplanting jobs from where the old stadium was to where the new stadium is. Do you think those businesses that depend on the Vike’s games are going to survive once they leave the dome? Not likely. So, they’ll move to the new stadium. Net gain of jobs = 0. “What about the construction?” you ask. How often are these contractors, architects and whatnot coming from out of state? The answer: quite often. Another loss on the MN job front. Guess it won’t help that much after all. The net gain for Minnesota: More debt, a rich guy made richer, very few jobs actually gained, and a game I STILL can’t afford to go to.

      Then let’s talk about what they want for a new stadium: Some people thought that the game in the two feet of snow was great. I doubt that will last for long as the open field games run into the typical MN cold. There was a reason they built the Dome with a roof in the first place. So, they make a stadium with a retractable roof. Cost: big money. Then the NFL tells them to keep the roof closed anyways like they did in Dallas. Except for the expensive amenities, a new stadium looks more and more pointless.

    • billy

      What?? Are you high, the stadium is not old

  • bubba136

    How much money have We lost while they drag their feet deciding. Take the roof off and send the vikings packing.

    • O RLY

      That still doesnt solve the problem of narrow concourses, poor food options, too few luxuary boxes and the cost of upgrading facilities from an indoor stadium to an outdoor one.

      If you want to send the vikings packing we might as well level the place

  • clarity

    They are not saying replace the stadium or repair the roof. They are questioning whether to repair the parts of the roof that are damaged, or replace the whole roof, not replace the whole stadium. Although I agree that the team shouldn’t get a new stadium right now. Too many other things that tax dollars would be better spent on.

  • Justin

    Apparently you people cannot read the article before commenting. It clearly says that insurance would cover all or almost all of the cost to either repair or replace the ROOF. How about we all calm down here.

  • 1627

    Justin & Clarity, people are strapped for cash right now so they automatically get frantic. Neither of you needs to be so harsh because it was “misread”.

    If, and only “if”, incsurance pays for it then they should replace it. The purpose for this is that if they only “repair” it then there “will” be talks of building a new one and right now this econonmy does not need that. MN is, and has been, how should I put this, behind in the “crisis economy, in other words it his us later. Star Tribune says this morning we are way below the what the national average is for those behind in mortgages. This means MN is going to go into a large foreclosure crisis yet this year and maybe next. 42% of all homeowners in MN are behind in their payments. ~ To sum it up, yes this does have to do with whether they will finance a stadium in the near future… not a good idea.

  • Go Vikes

    I’m not strapped for cash, I don’t mind my taxes going up a few cents to help fund a new Vikings stadium. How much would a tax increase really affect you? My guess is you lose more coins in your couch cushion a month then what it would cost you in taxes.

    • Melissa

      Then by all means, send your money to the governor with a note attached expressing your support, but don’t expect me to feel the same! I’d rather not have my tax dollars support a recreational sport, thank you very much.

      • Go Vikes

        I’d rather not have my tax dollars go to fund museums and theaters, but it does and I don’t complain. that’s just the way it is.

  • jim

    Always cheaper to repair. Just like a vehicle. It may not seem worth it to fix older vehicles but you are never going to spend the same money fixing an old car as you would buying a new one.

  • Jack

    You know reading all the negative comments one can only conclude that we are really not even half the fans Green Bay has. No wonder we cannot win a championship with fans like most of the above. Let me ask you’ll this question. Will more taxes for all your priority causes ever pay a dam dime of it back. In the life of this new stadium purposed it will clearly pay every tax payer dime back just as the Met and current dome did. Get some vision and settle down like Justin said the roof will be paid for by insurance either way. But make no mistake that dump will be torn down and it is way past its time. Thank God we don’t have the people above with no vision on Minnesota’s future running this state.

  • CJB

    It is a waste of time and money to just replace the roof in parts or in total. The stadium is long past its intended life-span and needs to be replaced. The argument of this not being the right time and the fact that there are more important things to spend money on is the same argument that is constantly repeated. Is there ever a good time to build a 700+ million dollar stadium? When has public opinion ever been in favor of building sport stadiums with either public money or help from the local government? The facts: The Vikings are a VERY valuable asset to this state… win, lose or draw. They make living in Minnesota… well, Minnesota! If they leave, not only does tax money, jobs and other things go too… but so does the quality of life in Minnesota. Don’t like football? That’s OK because I am sure my tax dollar goes for something that you DO like and I am fine with sharing… why aren’t you? We need to look no further then our friends to the East who just won a Super bowl. That’s a team owned by the citizens (I wish we could do the same but the NFL won’t allow it anymore) and they invested in keeping their stadium up to date. They believe that the game of football and their team is a vital part of their city and state. And it shows… their team is in the playoff hunt almost every year and the fans are some of the most dedicated (and a bit on the crazy side) in the entire country. Even the non-football residents of that state, I am sure, feel a bit more pride today and I am sure the added revenue in tourism and next year’s regular season games won’t hurt either! The people of this state need to learn how to look at the total picture and stop looking at things through the eyes of their own selfish interests. Yes, we need to fix our budget deficit. But we also need to focus on other things too like replacing our stadium that has out-lived its intended life span… that’s important too. Let me just say one other thing… would any debate exist if the roof would have collapsed five hours later then it did on that December morning? The dome would have been full of people about to watch a football game. The fact of the matter is, is that could have happened. Thank God it did not… but it shows the design is flawed and the fact that it happened showed it could happen again…at any time. It’s time to replace the dome in total, not in part. Long live the memories… I have some good ones of the Metrodome. But it’s time to move on. The Twins and Gophers did… the Vikings have been patient and waited for their turn. The time is now and this state could use the jobs in the construction industry and the added revenues. If anyone can find fault with that, then I have no idea what I am talking about.

    • Jarlaxle

      A good, common sense blog. They need to find a good way of getting a new stadium done.

    • Billy

      Does anyone else feel like reading a book right now? Not me.

      • CJB

        Then why did you???

    • Slim

      Wow, that is a lot of information…. Why can’t we expect more than 30 years out of a stadium? I would think that if we pay $1Billion for a new one, we should get at least 35 or so… But then people get bored with it and get huckstered by some millionaires that need OUR help? Oh well, might as well bend over and take it (again)…

      • Joe

        Why not build it so it will last longer? Look at Wrigley Field, or Fenway Park? How old are they? I’m for building a new stadium but would like to see what the actual costs would be and what the pay back would be. How much and how long for it to actually pay for it’s self, know what I mean?

      • Mils

        You can expect more than 30 years out of a stadium. The Dome was build very cheaply. Remember, the goal of the Dome was to “get fans in, let ’em see a game, and let ’em go home.” Nothing more.

  • John Sherman


  • Roger Wilson

    When a homeowner has a roof that has extensive hail damge, the insurance company replaces the entire roof, not just the shingles that are damaged.
    My understanding is that the dom’t isnurance would cover the cost of replacing tthe roof, so replace the roof and move on.
    No need to go out and spend billions for a different stadium. The current stadium works very well to play foot ball.
    Certainly, not the money moaker for the team’s owner, but the dome was built for the people, not the team’s owner.

  • Mark

    REPAIR IT, there probably won’t be a football season this year anyway.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Thursday Night Football

Listen Live