Wouldn’t the base be a better site for a megaplex? For one thing, access from outside Alameda would be easier — take the tube, turn right on Atlantic, then down to the cineplex — and would pose far less traffic for the rest of the island. Access from within the island would be via Atlantic, Lincoln, Central. Plenty of options. Good public trans. can also move people up & down the lsland. Transmogrifying the historic theater into a multiplex with a six story parking garage attached would pose problems on all fronts: aesthetic, environmental, and economic. Aesthetically, it would ruin the historic, folksy feel of Oak/Central and Park while also obliterating the existing horizon and clashing with surroundings. Environmentally, there’s increased traffic, noise, competition for parking, and the general disruption attracted by that kind of impersonal, mall atmosphere. In short, quality of life deteriorates. Economically, how will the thing pay for itself if tickets aren’t taxable and the lease is so cheap? The trend is away from multiplexes now, especially with home entertainment taking over. The proposed garage can’t support a full house — and that is assuming that the place draws. The result: cars search for parking in the already crowded neighborhood and among the reduced curbside spaces. It’s lose-lose: the original theater gets lost in the project; attendance at 6 C-grade movies and one B-grade film is likely to follow the existing, downward trend; and the community suffers more cars, noise, bad air, and congestion. The unique flavor of the area gets replaced by an anywhere-USA, generic landscape.
Put a multi-plex on the base, restore the Alameda Theater in the mode of the Grand Lake and Orinda — subdivide the upstairs into two small boxes, restoring the big one down stairs to its retro glory — and get someone who knows what they’re doing to operate it. Instead of a six-level garage, make it three, shoving one underground. The solution to the rest of the parking scarcity is satellite lots.
The most compelling argument I’ve heard in favor of the megaplex is that parents don’t like hauling kids or family off the island for a movie. Safety is an issue. Absolutely. And to that I would say that a three-screen mini-plex, properly run, is the answer. Meanwhile, Jack London and Emeryville (2 complexes there) are much closer and/or more easily accessible than the megaplexes that families further out in the east bay must travel for a movie. Let CineArts operate a three-screen, putting family or kid films on the two smaller screens and ‘art’ films on the big one. When the art film’s crowd tapers off, move it to one of the small boxes and screen an occasional kid or family film in the main theater. It can be done.
Wouldn’t the base be a better site for a megaplex? For one thing, access from outside Alameda would be easier — take the tube, turn right on Atlantic, then down to the cineplex — and would pose far less traffic for the rest of the island. Access from within the island would be via Atlantic, Lincoln, Central. Plenty of options. Good public trans. can also move people up & down the lsland. Transmogrifying the historic theater into a multiplex with a six story parking garage attached would pose problems on all fronts: aesthetic, environmental, and economic. Aesthetically, it would ruin the historic, folksy feel of Oak/Central and Park while also obliterating the existing horizon and clashing with surroundings. Environmentally, there’s increased traffic, noise, competition for parking, and the general disruption attracted by that kind of impersonal, mall atmosphere. In short, quality of life deteriorates. Economically, how will the thing pay for itself if tickets aren’t taxable and the lease is so cheap? The trend is away from multiplexes now, especially with home entertainment taking over. The proposed garage can’t support a full house — and that is assuming that the place draws. The result: cars search for parking in the already crowded neighborhood and among the reduced curbside spaces. It’s lose-lose: the original theater gets lost in the project; attendance at 6 C-grade movies and one B-grade film is likely to follow the existing, downward trend; and the community suffers more cars, noise, bad air, and congestion. The unique flavor of the area gets replaced by an anywhere-USA, generic landscape.
Put a multi-plex on the base, restore the Alameda Theater in the mode of the Grand Lake and Orinda — subdivide the upstairs into two small boxes, restoring the big one down stairs to its retro glory — and get someone who knows what they’re doing to operate it. Instead of a six-level garage, make it three, shoving one underground. The solution to the rest of the parking scarcity is satellite lots.
The most compelling argument I’ve heard in favor of the megaplex is that parents don’t like hauling kids or family off the island for a movie. Safety is an issue. Absolutely. And to that I would say that a three-screen mini-plex, properly run, is the answer. Meanwhile, Jack London and Emeryville (2 complexes there) are much closer and/or more easily accessible than the megaplexes that families further out in the east bay must travel for a movie. Let CineArts operate a three-screen, putting family or kid films on the two smaller screens and ‘art’ films on the big one. When the art film’s crowd tapers off, move it to one of the small boxes and screen an occasional kid or family film in the main theater. It can be done.