RKO Keith's Richmond Hill Theatre

117-09 Hillside Avenue,
Richmond Hill, NY 11418

Unfavorite 25 people favorited this theater

Showing 201 - 225 of 427 comments

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 26, 2008 at 9:25 am

Good point, Bway. Thanks.

Bway
Bway on August 25, 2008 at 7:22 pm

Perhaps how the drug store was put in the Meserole Theater. That buiding suits it’s new use fine, yet preserved the integrity of the building.

Luis Vazquez
Luis Vazquez on August 25, 2008 at 3:46 pm

Agreed, Peter K and Panzer65! I would rather see a bank or a CVS that keeps the architecture that have it all torn down or gutted.

Panzer65
Panzer65 on August 25, 2008 at 2:58 pm

If impending fate does happen, perhaps the new owner will do renovations, but respect the theater’s architectural integrity, thereby having a historic building we can visit and enjoy for generations.

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 25, 2008 at 11:49 am

You may be right, LuisV. However, anything (being made into a Duane Reade) would be better than the fate of the Flushing Keith’s : sitting there as a derelict, dangerous hulk, while developers do nothing with it.

Luis Vazquez
Luis Vazquez on August 25, 2008 at 11:46 am

I don’t mean to be gloomy, but I honestly don’t see how a petition helps this theater. If I’m the new owner, I’m going to say “Keep your signatures! How am I going to get a return on my $2MM investment while still keeping this structure as a theater?”

Unless he has an answer to that question then this theater doesn’t have much hope of surviving. The best we can hope for is that a subsequent use preserves most of the interior.

As I’ve expressed before, this theater is not landmarked, there is NO interest in any organization to utilize this theater as a performing arts space and no City or Corporate entity has offered any grants or subsidies to restore and operate this theater. What is a petition going to do?

At Loew’s Kings, the city is the owner (thank goodness) and the city has offered substantial grants to potential developers. Today, I saw that the Brooklyn Paramount, which has been out of commission as a theater for 42 years is being brought back into service as a theater by its current owner, Long Island Universtity. LIU is a substantial owner with potential big pockets. Sadly, we couldn’t be further from that situation with the Keiths. It seems to me that this Keiths will meet the same sad fate as it’s sister Keiths in Flushing. I just don’t see how this will have a happy ending and I am an optomist.

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 25, 2008 at 11:26 am

How can we implement a petition ? I’m sure Michael Perlman (“Native Forest Hiller” here on CT)already knows of this.

GeorgeTobor
GeorgeTobor on August 25, 2008 at 11:22 am

I wholeheartedly agree. This former theatre is in eminent danger. Bingo alone will not suffice. A new owner will want a larger income for their investment. Perhaps this building will be gutted for use as a drugstore. A petition is an excellent idea. A petition should be implemented soon.
George

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 25, 2008 at 10:40 am

You’re probably right, Bway, and I don’t think that there’s much that we on CT can do, except e-sign another petition, once Michael Perlman gets one going.

Bway
Bway on August 25, 2008 at 10:37 am

I hope you are wrong Luis, but I am sure you are not wrong. This marquee thing is only the beginning. The writing is on the wall for this theater. It has been preserved for so long, even if a diamond in the rough, but either the original chandeliers still hang inside. The former owner has been very “kind” to the building.
But I am sure that the new owner, who just spent almost $2 million dollars for the building, probably has a different idea for the buidling than just using it as a flea market and BINGO hall. Unfortunately, I think we may be in the final hours of this theater. Until now, it was virtually intact inside. Unfortunately, the removal of the letters are probably a sign of what is to come.

Luis Vazquez
Luis Vazquez on August 23, 2008 at 9:19 am

Thanks Bway. Now it makes total sense. With the sale, we ARE dealing with a new owner. As a result, he is going to want a return on his investment that is probably greater than what is coming in now. That’s probably going to mean a new use for this building and it probably won’t entail a theater renovation. If anything, it will probably be just the opposite. This theater is not landmarked and if the owner wants to make sure that that doesn’t happen, he is more likely to make non theatrical alterations sooner rather than later. The marquee desecration is probably only the beginning. I hope that I’m wrong.

Panzer65
Panzer65 on August 23, 2008 at 6:23 am

Much like theaters of the past, the sign “Closed for Renovations"or "Space for Lease” could appear at any time, just like the one that appeared on Ridgewood’s marquee.

Bway
Bway on August 22, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Okay, here’s what I found out in the NYC records. It may not be good news, but it may explain the recent desecration of the building.

The building was sold on January 31, 2008 buy the 117-11 Realty Corp for $1,875,000. The building HAS been sold. There IS a new owner.

Apparently, unfortunately, the new owner saw fit to remove the RKO Lettering from the marquee. If this is a sign of further things to come to this theater, this is NOT good news as to what will happen to the rest of the building.

This is why I found this so unbelievable when I heard the marquee was sabotaged, as years back, I remember reading that the owner was “proud” that it was so well preserved underneath. But now we aren’t dealing what THAT owner anymore…..

Bway
Bway on August 22, 2008 at 3:13 pm

The 54X111 sized lot probably only is the front part of the building, the lobby. The RKO Keith’s, just like The Madison in Ridgewood, the Ridgewood Theater, the Meserole, etc, etc only occupy the space of about a store along their facades, but the theater auditorium itself spreads out behind the facade and other stores on the block. that is also the case with the Keiths.

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 22, 2008 at 9:17 am

That makes sense, LuisV. Unfortunately.

Luis Vazquez
Luis Vazquez on August 22, 2008 at 8:59 am

Bway, I totally agree with you that the removal of the lettering is very disturbing especially since we do not yet know why! The reporter didn’t ask and no one else has provided a credible explanation.

The fact is that the current owner has maintained this theater more or less in its current state of benign neglect for the last few decades. It is unlikely that a new owner would be as kind. I don’t see much hope for this theater if it is sold, but unfortunately, I don’t see much hope for it under the current owner either. How much can a flea market/bingo hall possibly bring in. Certainly not enough for any kind of a restoration and he would only do it if it increased his business which leads us to the issue that renovations (unless materially covered by government grants or subsidies) have to be financially viable and pay for themselves in new business income. Sadly, I don’t see that for this theater.

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 22, 2008 at 8:14 am

I can understand 117-09 117th Street, but not 116th Street.

Could this contradictory information have anything to do with the RKO Keith Richmond Hill’s current problems ?

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 22, 2008 at 7:18 am

I don’t know, Bway. Let’s continue to keep an eye on this theatre.

Bway
Bway on August 21, 2008 at 9:00 pm

I highly doubt any of the people writing here go often to the Bingo Hall, or the flea market to make a difference either way.
But that of course being said, while I agree with what Luis said about the theater remaining so intact, that doesn’t absolve the fact that for no reason, all of a sudden they decided to remove the RKO Keiths from the marquee, which now looks like crap again. The building looked so go when that awful aluminum was removed, and the old marquee exposed….why would they take a step backwards?

Luis Vazquez
Luis Vazquez on August 21, 2008 at 12:01 pm

Yes, that’s exactly what we need to save the Keiths! A boycott that will force the current owner to either abandon the theater or sell to someone else who will very likely gut it for other uses.

Regardless of how you feel, the reality is that the current owner has kept the theater more or less intact for decades as he operated a bingo hall/flea market. It’s highly unlikely that another operator would be as kind to this structure.

This theater is not landmarked and is not in an area that would work well as a performing arts center and certainly not as a movie theater again. No one has come forward with any alternate use for this space that would retain its architecture and enable it to sustain itself going forward.

Knowing all of this, I would hope George would change his mind about any boycott of the current owner unless he’s willing to step in and buy the theater himself. Then he could show us how easy this problem is to solve.

GeorgeTobor
GeorgeTobor on August 21, 2008 at 8:28 am

Perhaps a boycott by bingo players and swap meet attendees would have an impact on the owner of this structure. An explanation for the alterations could be forthcoming if said actions were taken.
George

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 21, 2008 at 7:59 am

Thanks, Bway. What can we do about it ?

Bway
Bway on August 21, 2008 at 7:57 am

This is absolutely TRAGIC. The building looked so good with that old historic lettering on it. How can the owners actually think this looks better? Why they did this is a mystery.

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 18, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Thanks, Panzer65. Never went there, but looks like an interesting place !

PeterKoch
PeterKoch on August 18, 2008 at 1:47 pm

Thanks, Panzer65 !