The future of Memorial Hall, one of Hutchinson’s most iconic historic buildings, took another step forward on Thursday evening. The city held a community meeting at memorial hall to gather input as the city council weighs four potential paths forward for the aging landmark.
Built in 1912 and originally known as Convention Hall, Memorial Hall is a defining structure within the Downtown Core South Historic District. Despite its historic significance, the building faces major structural and financial challenges that limit its usability and burdens the city’s budget.
Currently, Memorial Hall operates at an annual net loss of nearly $100,000. The building is only rentable from October to May due to the absence of a modern HVAC system, and its rental income falls short of covering basic operating expenses, which range from $110,000 to $126,000 each year.
The city has presented four primary options for the building's future:
- Sell or lease the building for private redevelopment
- Demolish the building and convert the site into a new public space
- Maintain the building as is, without making significant upgrades
- Consider alternative ideas proposed by the community
To make Memorial Hall viable for year-round use, the city estimates a required investment of over $5.03 million. That figure includes critical upgrades to the HVAC, electrical systems, accessibility, kitchen, restrooms, and interior finishes. However, it does not include the cost of modern audiovisual systems, new furniture, staffing, or the building’s considerable ongoing utility and maintenance costs—estimated at over $200,000 annually.
Complicating matters further, the structure is built over Cow Creek, raising concerns about potential unseen structural issues that could emerge during renovation.
“Memorial Hall holds a unique place in our city’s history, but its future comes with a substantial price tag,” said a city spokesperson. “We’re seeking honest feedback from the community to determine whether preserving this historic building is the right path—or whether another option better serves Hutchinson moving forward.”