Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I cannot agree with this statement. I have lived most of my 47 years in the same home. My kids went to the same Elementary School that I attended. It means a great deal to them. A few years back they tore the school down to build a bigger and better school. I agree the new school is nice, but even my kids say they wish they had not torn down "our school". When demo began it was my sons that wanted to go get some bricks, which we did...one for each of us.

River Oaks Theater has that same "our theater" feeling for myself. My mom and I went there often and we spent many a day shopping in RO Shopping Center. I lost my mother over 20 years ago and cherish each memory I have. Just 2 weekends ago I was at the RO Shopping center and remembered about the little dress shop "Buttonwood Tree" that we loved to go to, and was saddened that it was no longer there. But the shopping center and theatre are there and it means a lot to me that they are. And that I can still go there.

I guess I'm saying that I WANT the physical to show others the memories... and I know they mean something to my sons. They ask questions about when I was a child all the time.

this is exactly what i'm thinking. these historical structures give us a greater sense of who we are and who we were. to dismiss them is to make our past insignificant. it IS worth the trouble to preserve grandma's piano or the theatre our parents took us to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point to me is that there is only one (maybe two, I think someone mentioned another one) old theater left that is still in service. There are many, many high rise condos and retail centers. There is plenty of land on which new things can be built. Once you tear something down, you cannot rebuild the history. It is gone.

One of the reasons Europe is so great to visit is the history. The old buildings. Would London be as cool as it is if every 50 years they tore down their existing structures to build the new retail of the time?

Its time Houston stopped razing existing structures to build new, just because a historical area is considered "neat". Once you tear down that which makes the area "neat" it is no longer "neat" and business cut their losses, move on and leave a desolated area in their wake. Only to later be brought back into style later, and razed to build whatever is envouge at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you guys checked the signatures on the ipetitions site? There are like 30 new signatures a minute on there. Check it out

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/riveroa...natures-65.html

Thanks so much sevfiv for the link!

oh my! that's fantastic...i am so glad it is picking up signatures so quickly!

sooo...some have memories of the theater, some like to visit it and the stores around it, some just think it is neat, and some like nostalgia and the link with some history...

much like maria isabel and the demoltion of the valentine house in the sixth ward, there are countless other locations for these "projects."

there is such great irreverence and obtrusiveness when it comes to houston and anything pre-1975

thank goodness i collect postcards <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note two topics on this have been merged.

Thanks for the petition link. Interesting to see the number of well-known locals that have signed, even though there are those that would argue they have no business in what owners do with their property, regardless of how it affects the city, and that their nosiness is leading us straight down the road to collectivism. Signatories include famous socialists such as Denton Cooley, Brent Spiner, Stephen Fox, Carolyn Farb, even Weingarten heiress Lea Fastow :o .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Signatories include famous socialists such as ... Brent Spiner

:blink:

Wow. Data. That's just awesome!

Heh! I wonder if anyone's contacted Houstonians with ties to Hollywood: Shelley Duvall, Wes Anderson, the Quaid brothers and Patrick Swayze. Heck, maybe Jack Valenti might chime in on this.

Edited by gonzo1976
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you haven't done so, check out the online petition. There are almost 5,000 responses and they are rolling in by the minute. I'm really proud of Houston right now. :) If nothing else, Weingarten Realty has a public relations disaster on their hands. They're certainly not being seen as good corporate citizens, especially since this is their home city.

I haven't finished my letter yet, but in it I want to point out that apart from the whole issue of trampling on people's memories, there is a real economic cost to the city of this kind of thing. The last thing Houston needs to be competitive is to contribute to its reputation as a place that is content to bulldoze its history to keep developers happy. That only works against us.

In addition to addresses listed above, I'm cc-ing Central Houston, Greater Houston Partnership, and the Convention and Visitors Bureau. Also KUHF.org.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't demonized anyone.

I find it discouraging, but not surprising given your track record on this forum, that instead of engaging in an healthy debate on a particular subject, you choose to answer those whose opinions differ from your own with an insult and one-liners.

In any event, I'm done with this subject--it appears everyone's position on the issue is already set, including, I suppose, my own. Good luck with the petition, and I mean that in all sincerity.

I think you've just become a broken record of a tune no one cares to hear. We all get what you're saying. Most don't agree. You're dangerously reaching troll status on this subject; far from healthy debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some great comments on that petition. I love the part about "who would have thought Weingarten could out think themselves by putting two Starbucks across the street from each other! Please out do yourselves again and find a way to save it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note two topics on this have been merged.

Thanks for the petition link. Interesting to see the number of well-known locals that have signed, even though there are those that would argue they have no business in what owners do with their property, regardless of how it affects the city, and that their nosiness is leading us straight down the road to collectivism. Signatories include famous socialists such as Denton Cooley, Brent Spiner, Stephen Fox, Carolyn Farb, even Weingarten heiress Lea Fastow :o .

WOW!!! This is friggin awesome. I've gone from depressed (yesterday) to excited today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, you are not reading the responses carefully. No one is claiming that Weingarten should have no right to do as they please. The outpouring of responses is intended to get Weingarten to rethink whether they want to do this. Weingarten is a real estate company. They build and lease property to retailers. If their actions offend potential customers, those customers may decide to take their business elsewhere. Weingarten must decide if the new construction outweighs the offended potential customers.

You know, if I were a Weingarten rep, I'd start considering an incremental raise in the Landmark's rents in such a way that they'd be forced to raise their ticket prices about a dollar at a time. This would be the best test of all as to whether they were creating as much public benefit as is ascribed to the theatre. Once its return as a business investment has been reduced to about the prime rate, they should only at that point make a feasibility analysis on the tower.

If there is more profit for Weingarten at that point in building a tower than there would be for leasing old movie theater, then that is a good comparative indicator of the level of social benefit that either option would create. My scheme would, of course, have to be adjusted by using an econometric model to account for various financial nuances, but in theory, that'd be a good way to make the decision in a fairly altruistic and socially responsible way that still makes sense for the landlord.

...of course, they may have to account for the die-hards that boycott the shopping center, but something tells me that their tenants could absorb that loss...after all, they'd have an on-site residential population feeding them. It is unlikely that Weingarten would see any negative financial ramifications from the negative press.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the petition is going well but what can we (or anybody) do take this thing further? Does anyone here have connections to a local TV station or The Chronicle?

The reporter who wrote the original Chronicle article chimed in yesterday to say she is working on a follow-up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

however, by your rationale, i should easily sell my grandmother's handcarved piano that i have no place for. i love this piano. it doesn't play well. it doesn't go with my other furnishings. perhaps i should just let it go, commit it to memory,
bachanon, that is not my rationale in any sense. The reason is that, unlike the theater, the piano is yours. It has been in your family, it (I assume) has been passed down to you, and now you can do with it as you please.
I cannot agree with this statement. I have lived most of my 47 years in the same home. My kids went to the same Elementary School that I attended. It means a great deal to them. A few years back they tore the school down to build a bigger and better school. I agree the new school is nice, but even my kids say they wish they had not torn down "our school". When demo began it was my sons that wanted to go get some bricks, which we did...one for each of us.

River Oaks Theater has that same "our theater" feeling for myself. My mom and I went there often and we spent many a day shopping in RO Shopping Center. I lost my mother over 20 years ago and cherish each memory I have. Just 2 weekends ago I was at the RO Shopping center and remembered about the little dress shop "Buttonwood Tree" that we loved to go to, and was saddened that it was no longer there. But the shopping center and theatre are there and it means a lot to me that they are. And that I can still go there.

Martha, I was simply offering a different perspective on the River Oaks Theater situation. I actually agree with your sentiments, especially regarding schools and theaters. I was horrified when I heard Reagan was to be torn down, and blissfully relieved when I heard that was not the case. However, had it been razed, I would have been heartbroken, but it would have done nothing to diminish my memories of the old school.

As to your feelings for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the petition is going well but what can we (or anybody) do take this thing further?

It is impressive that more than 6000 people have signed the petition. The Chronicle story was great, and it has been talked about in local blogs, organizations, and sites like this. I think the tough thing is going to be keeping the heat on, and getting involvement from people with more punch. This is why I am emailing the Greater Houston Partnership, Central Houston, the River Oaks Property Association, and of course City Council and the Mayor. The more publicity the better, but I don't want to have to rely on the petition alone. The heavy-hitters have to see that the public cares about this one.

The bad news is Weingarten's reaction. They don't return calls and have refused to speak to GHPA. It sounds like they are just hunkering down and waiting for it to pass. When the time comes they'll tear the theater down and throw the public a bone like putting some fake movie sign on front of the tower. Somehow I have this mental image of the Weingarten CEO as being like Mr Potter in "It's a Wonderful Life" - kicking puppies, shoving people out of the way, and throwing cigar butts out the window of a limousine.

Btw it has been fun reading the names on the petition. I was surprised at how many names I recognized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bad news is Weingarten's reaction. They don't return calls and have refused to speak to GHPA. It sounds like they are just hunkering down and waiting for it to pass. When the time comes they'll tear the theater down and throw the public a bone like putting some fake movie sign on front of the tower.

Maybe Weingarten hasn't made a decision dealing specifically with the theatre.... perhaps its still very very early in the process.

If they havent made a decsion yet, they have nothing to comment on...

Edited by Highway6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but has anyone contacted or heard from Landmark's Corporate Office? I may be mistaken, but I believe Landmark is co-owned by that Maverick in Dallas, Mark Cuban.

I remember reading that Cuban goal was to convert all Landmark Cinemas to a Digital Format. I don't know anything about cinema technology, but the RO Theater may not be very open to this type of change. The battle to save this great theater may need to include petitions and such to Landmark expressing our concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Weingarten hasn't made a decision dealing specifically with the theatre.... perhaps its still very very early in the process.

If they havent made a decsion yet, they have nothing to comment on...

And that may very well be the case. But the point is, Public Relations 101 teaches companies that in this kind of situation you get in front of the problem. And, thanks to Weingarten

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Objective idealogues like myself that aren't strapped in to an emotional position and instead take a viewpoint from 10,000 feet up are far and few in between. We're also not popular."

LOL. You truly crack me up. I'd love to meet you in person because I am sure you'd be fun at a dinner party. I'd wonder though if you'd grace us emotional twits from your perch in the clouds?

It's fine to play the objective business man with no emotional attachments from time to time, but at what cost? It also takes a man to grow a pair to admit that some things are worth responding to emotionally...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Objective idealogues like myself that aren't strapped in to an emotional position and instead take a viewpoint from 10,000 feet up are far and few in between. We're also not popular."

LOL. You truly crack me up. I'd love to meet you in person because I am sure you'd be fun at a dinner party. I'd wonder though if you'd grace us emotional twits from your perch in the clouds?

It's fine to play the objective business man with no emotional attachments from time to time, but at what cost? It also takes a man to grow a pair to admit that some things are worth responding to emotionally...

You beat me too it Kinkade...I was emotionaly involved at the moment. ;)

Seriously though, it's a fight worth fighting and I welcome all with the ability to display and use their emotions to join this passionate fight.

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...