Don’t forget past in rush to future
When it was publicly announced that a ninescreen movie theater was the latest choice to fill that big hole in Monument Square that used to be City
Hall, I was immediately struck by two thoughts as I looked over a very preliminary artist’s conception of what would likely become the centerpiece of the renaissance of the downtown area:
• A high-end movie theater similar to the one developer Sonny Bonacio built for Bow Tie Cinemas in Saratoga Springs seems a perfect fit with the so-far-successful redevelopment of the area radiating out from Monument Square into an arts and entertainment district. As city officials said during the announcement of their choice, the cineplex would anchor what they would like to see become a downtown that is active 18 hours a day — I’m guessing from 8 a.m. to 2 a.m. — instead of one where many of the shops close their doors at 5 or 6 p.m. unless there’s a special event going on,
• I shouldn’t say the proposal is perfect, however. While the glass and steel building shown in those first artist renditions is visually stunning — just as the one built about a block off Broadway in the Spa City — it would stick out like a sore thumb in an area dominated by buildings whose architecture dates back at least a century, even two or more centuries in a handful of cases. Of course, that probably won’t matter much to most people who will drive downtown beginning late in the fall of 2018 to enjoy a movie, but it should.
Whether accidentally or intentionally, the city hit on a popular formula nationwide for reviving downtown areas whose best days passed in the 1960s and ’70s, when the growth in popularity of suburban living was followed by the similar exodus of many of the businesses that served those people. Urban downtowns from coast to coast became largely residential and commercial wastelands, left only for those too poor to afford a move to the suburbs and businesses that cater to them, until the 1990s, when cities such as Cleveland, Baltimore and San Antonio successfully revived rundown sections of their downtowns as arts and entertainment districts.
If you visit Baltimore’s Inner Harbor or San Antonio’s Riverwalk today, you can see what Troy’s downtown — and perhaps its entire riverfront — could become if officials stick to a plan that so far seems to have worked well, except for the old City Hall site, that is. The proposed cineplex is the fourth different proposal the city has entertained for that property since the old City Hall was torn down in 2011, but the first that really fits with what’s
been happening in that area organically. With only a few exceptions, the many stories we publish about new downtown businesses fit into that mold. Bars, restaurants, boutiques and galleries make up the bulk of those, mixed with professional offices and apartments to form what until now has largely been a 9-to-5 neighborhood built around government offices and courts and their workers. What’s been missing, though, is an anchor that can bring people downtown at different times of the day and night, allowing the neighborhood to fit officials’ vision of an “18hour downtown.” With expectations of as many as 10,000 people coming downtown weekly to see films on the theater’s nine screens — or a 10th that will be housed just down the block in a renovated former American Theater — that’s a lot of people looking for places to eat or shop either before or after their movie — and I’m sure a lot more than any single current merchant can take credit for. The hope, I’m sure is for the theater to helps all those other current and future downtown businesses to grow and thrive around that centerpiece. People who live downtown in the many apartments developed on the upper floors of buildings whose ground floors are home to these many businesses or services may have lobbied for a supermarket or some other business that would appeal to them, but that would have been the wrong way for officials to go if they were looking to act in the city’s best interests. While adding a supermarket may make the area more appealing to possible residential tenants, the numbers alone suggest the theater will have a much bigger impact on the city as a whole. To do that, though, the developers need to make one tweak to their plan to truly make the theater the centerpiece of the downtown renaissance. Instead of an ode to modern architecture, the cineplex needs to maintain the historic character local officials have tried hard to protect. Now, I’m no architect, so I obviously can’t say how much — if any — expense it would add to the project, but I would guess at some point in the ongoing process of getting city permissions, officials are going to at least ask that the developers consider something more in line with the traditionally styled brickface buildings that surround it along River Street. While some may look simply at the added expense and wonder if the change is worth it, but if you ask officials past and present in Baltimore, Cleveland or San Antonio, I’m sure they’ll tell you the look of the downtown area is almost as important as what it offers. While a modern theater with full restaurant and bar service and other high- end amenities may bring moviegoers downtown a first time, the curiousity factor alone isn’t going to be enough to keep ticket lines filled. To do that requires more than just good movies and fresh popcorn; to make people come back, you have to make them want to come back. And when it comes to that, looks do matter. I’m sure I’ll be sitting through countless public discussions of the project before it opens its doors for the holiday season in 2018, and I expect — or at least hope — those discussions will focus on what’s best for the big picture of the city’s future, because after three other failed starts, officials are going to get too many more chances to get it right. Finally. Between the Lines appears every Tuesday in The Record.