"We support the expansion and renovation of the State Theatre"
From the Woodland Record – Letter to the editor:
Dear City Council Members, City Manager and Redevelopment Manager:
We do NOT support the Petrovich theatre development proposal, as it does not fit into the Downtown Specific Plan well at all. The Downtown Specific Plan, with which we became intimately familiar while working on affordable housing issues, was painstakingly created in order to preserve and enhance our city's downtown.
Mr. Petrovich's plan will not only destroy the historic Electric Garage building, but will result in another cookie-cutter theatre complex that will blend into and enhance our existing downtown about as well as his Rite Aid will enhance the Wiseman Building and the "gateway to the downtown" that was so painstakingly designed and implemented a few years ago at Main and East Streets.
Read more at WoodlandRecord.com.
Posts
21 comments:
Not me State Theatre was crap years ago and will be nothing but crap. Let Woodland have something decent.
I'm sorry, but I won't allow my children to go to the state, and at least half the parents who I have heard from on the subject feel the same way. It is the most insanitary public place I know. At least it was when I finally said "enough is enough", which has been a couple of years and counting. I'm all for the historic value, but that place is over the top.
6:12 and 8:16
What part of renovation don't you understand?
Please don't be rude simply because you don't like my opinion. It substantially weakens your argument. Is that something YOU can comprehend?
I understand the concept of renovation, thank you. I do not, however, have a great deal of faith in those efforts. The problem is more than the building, the root of the problem is the lack commitment by management. That is why my children do not go there. No amount of renovation will change that. And for the record, I'm not at all fond of another Petrovich Theatre either. I think they are or both trouble.
8:32
Where in the letter, or the WR article, did you get the idea the management would be the same?
The renovation (meaning all cleaned up) and expansion (meaning brand new extra screens) is what the city is looking for.
This proposal will save an historic building, like it or not it's historic. And actually, it will save two historic buildings... the State and the Electric Garage.
All renovated. Plus new screens and management.
So if you don't want people to question your opinion, try to do your homework before you type it and hit the publish button.
What ever happened to the on ramp or over pass that Petrovich was suppose to have done?
Woodland doe not need another theatre the one on East street is fine. A theatre at 3rd & Main will not bring down town back to life. Dream on!
Okay... you have my attention then. Are we talking a complete change of guard? I failed to see that part.
The current owner of the State Theatre will not do any renovation. He has already been burned by the city and the state and he is just not at the point in his life to carry out such a project.
The developer has an agreement with the owner to buy the theater. The developer also has other deals working with all surrounding vacant lots.
The current operator has told the developer that a new multiplex will be outside his scope of management.
The developer will be leasing the renovated building and brand new theaters to another theater operator.
9:15
If the Third and Main multiplex is allowed to be built, both the State (three screens) and Cinemark (five screens) will be forced out of business.
Cinemark was asked if they wanted to be the operator of the renovated State project. They declined for a variety of reasons, one being their lease with the mall.
A renovated State Theatre and cineplex may, or may not, force Cinemark out of business. I am not the developer, nor the operator who will determine how many screens the State cineplex will have. The other wild card is the city staff and council... they are mesmerized by the Third and Main developer and the idea of 8 to 12 screens. Bigger is not always better.
A multiplex will not be the only thing that can invigorate the downtown, but it is one of many things that probably needs to happen.
9:09
Petrovich is not obligated to build an overpass or on ramp. Because of Kirkwood, Petrovich only needed to allow the city TO BUY land from him for an on ramp to southbound I-5. That is just one of the many deals that Petrovich has gotten for the last decade.
What does State's operator Mike Morgan think?
Addressed in my 10:05 comment.
I tried to add my name to the list. I got an error message that told me I needed Java Script enabled to give my name. Can someone out ther help me??? I do not know what this means.
Signed,
Lost in blogland
Just wondering why Ed Shelly, Tom and Meg Stallard and Brenda Cedarboyd are not included in the names on the list of "Friends"
You can email stories@woodlandrecord.com
Dear Anon 5:33,
I am not sure what you are getting at or implying. If I wanted to sign or join, I would. If you have any questions my email is
brenda@historicnelsonranch.com
I am perfectly capable of writing my own letter to the city etc...
You on the other hand, can at the very least sign your own name to your post.
Brenda Cedarblade (not boyd :-) )
5:33
Did you really ask that? Why someone's not on a list?
Dino - thanks for the link to the WJ, which apparently published Bill's and my letter to the City Council. It was NOT a "letter to the editor," but an e-mail sent to all five city council members. I don't know how the WJ got a copy of it, but since we stand behind what we write (and say), at least we can thank the WJ for printing it in its entirety.
Leslie Bowman Marcus
Leslie,
David Wilkinson, founder of the Friends of the State Theatre, sent your letter to city council to me, the editor of the Woodland Record, on Monday afternoon. I was cc'd in his reply to you. So since I was cc'd, and you knew about it, I published it at WoodlandRecord.com. The intro to the letter was published at WoodlandJournal.com as a teaser for the full letter at WR... as is customary when we publish letters to council members that may be of interest to the public.
The letter published at WR clearly opens with "Dear City Council Members, City Manager and Redevelopment Manager," so despite the editorial/opinion category called "Letters to the editor," it is very clear who the intended recipients are.
The only time I might edit letters is for punctuation or clarification, other than it is our policy to not cut anything and not change anything in any letter to the editor or to any government representatives.
I can remove it if you like.
Dino, no need to remove our letter. I didn't see Dave Wilkinson's e-mail to me showing that he had sent the e-mail Bill and I had sent to city council members on to you and/or the WR. No problem, no worries. Thanks for posting it in the first place! Save the State Theatre!
Leslie Bowman Marcus
Post a Comment