Large Downtown Tulsa Movie Theater

[tulsascoot]

you all seem to forget that a theater downtown will serve the population beyond the IDL. I live at 11th and Lewis and would go to that theater. There are thousands of homes within a couple miles of downtown. So I say build it and they will come.

[Hoss]

Completely understand it.

I just think something like a large movie theater comes after the population establishes itself. I was also a big opponent of the BOk Center and ONEOK Field, which were successful to at least some extent, because I thought we should spend that money on other things in downtown. In my opinion, I'd like downtown to be more of a business center and residential community...and less of an entertainment center.

And now that I read this again, if you were against both the arena and ballpark, then I'm going to guess you're in that block of Tulsans who want to keep us in the 20th century.  Because as a regular patron, I can tell you for a fact, and I'm pretty sure business owners in downtown will agree, that both the arena AND the ballpark help their businesses, which in turn attracts other business to the area.

[SXSW]

My hope is that a downtown theater is located on Elgin, preferably the surface lot at 2nd St (as there would be space behind to the east for a lot or a parking garage that could also serve the rest of the Blue Dome).  It would be a mix between a Warren Theater with the digital cinema, balcony seating with food/drink, and first-run movies and an Alamo Drafthouse with its indie films and special events.  It would also have a huge neon marquee and main entrance at 2nd & Elgin like the Warren in Old Town Wichita:



Or the AMC in downtown Fort Worth that has a Deco flair:

[David]

And now that I read this again, if you were against both the arena and ballpark, then I'm going to guess you're in that block of Tulsans who want to keep us in the 20th century.  Because as a regular patron, I can tell you for a fact, and I'm pretty sure business owners in downtown will agree, that both the arena AND the ballpark help their businesses, which in turn attracts other business to the area.

1. The arena cost a tremendous amount of money that, in my opinion, could have been used for public infrastructure projects like light rail, more consistent bus routes and bike lanes. We don't have a major professional team, so I have a hard time justifying the size of an arena for a few concerts a month, couple of basketball games and a minor league hockey team.

2. I don't understand the need for another baseball stadium when you already have one fully adequate at the fairgrounds.

I have my own view of what downtown should be, and it isn't copying everything OKC does as a mini-scale version.

[Teatownclown]

1. The arena cost a tremendous amount of money that, in my opinion, could have been used for public infrastructure projects like light rail, more consistent bus routes and bike lanes. We don't have a major professional team, so I have a hard time justifying the size of an arena for a few concerts a month, couple of basketball games and a minor league hockey team.

2. I don't understand the need for another baseball stadium when you already have one fully adequate at the fairgrounds.

I have my own view of what downtown should be, and it isn't copying everything OKC does as a mini-scale version.

+1

[jacobi]

I think that the idea that residential first or Amenities first is a wrong way to think about it.  The population and the amenities scaffold each other.  Bars and restaurants were first, now first wave of residential.  After places Like tribune two start filling up, the next wave of amenities can really begin (which to my mind would include a movie theater).

I don't think one can get beyond a drive-in-to-downtown bar scene until you have a residential component that supports it.  But I Dont think one can move past a sertain segment of potential housing customer (i.e. those who are young and want to live downtown or people who work downtown or both)  without offering something like a movie theater (a grocery store and liquor store are important too but they are already spoken for).  The goal is to make it not just possible, but more conveniant for those who live downtown, to never need to go east of peoria (ok I'll throw in the pearl and cherry).

[Hoss]

1. The arena cost a tremendous amount of money that, in my opinion, could have been used for public infrastructure projects like light rail, more consistent bus routes and bike lanes. We don't have a major professional team, so I have a hard time justifying the size of an arena for a few concerts a month, couple of basketball games and a minor league hockey team.

2. I don't understand the need for another baseball stadium when you already have one fully adequate at the fairgrounds.

I have my own view of what downtown should be, and it isn't copying everything OKC does as a mini-scale version.

Wow, you just lost all credibility with me if you think we're trying to copy OKC.  Next you're going to say were going to blast out trenches and make a blue river that winds its way around downtown.

And light rail?  Really?  It wasn't until both Dallas and Houston's metro areas reached sizes around 3 million before they started talking about that.  While I think rail is an awesome idea, it doesn't suit Tulsa currently because downtown doesn't hold the densest employment sectors.  While those two don't either, they're much more dense relatively than Tulsa is.

And also, the arena has turned a profit since it opened in 2008.  In these economic times I consider that a win.  I also consider the fact that I don't have to drive to OKC, KC or Dallas to see a decent concert another win.  It may not ascribe to your 'vision', if it could be called that, but the voters voted on it.  I fail to see how complaining about it now is productive.  That was six years ago.

You could always move somewhere that doesn't like change.

[Nik]

1. The arena cost a tremendous amount of money that, in my opinion, could have been used for public infrastructure projects like light rail, more consistent bus routes and bike lanes. We don't have a major professional team, so I have a hard time justifying the size of an arena for a few concerts a month, couple of basketball games and a minor league hockey team.

2. I don't understand the need for another baseball stadium when you already have one fully adequate at the fairgrounds.

I have my own view of what downtown should be, and it isn't copying everything OKC does as a mini-scale version.

The Drillers were done with the fairgrounds. Either Tulsa built them a new stadium downtown or they were moving to Jenks.

[bmuscotty]

Its to bad all the theaters that were downtown are all gone. There's something about an old movie theater (single screen) that puts the multiplexes to shame. How many did Tulsa used to have downtown? 5 or 6?

[ZYX]

1. The arena cost a tremendous amount of money that, in my opinion, could have been used for public infrastructure projects like light rail, more consistent bus routes and bike lanes. We don't have a major professional team, so I have a hard time justifying the size of an arena for a few concerts a month, couple of basketball games and a minor league hockey team.

2. I don't understand the need for another baseball stadium when you already have one fully adequate at the fairgrounds.

I have my own view of what downtown should be, and it isn't copying everything OKC does as a mini-scale version.

We are far from copying OKC. Bricktown is a cheesy tourist trap. Their new housing is highly concentrated, outs is more spread out. They have a large park downtown, we have several smaller ones, with more under construction and planned. I think ultimately, in 30 years when both downtowns are almost fully developed, Tulsa's will be the better of the two. Our downtown will be more integrated, with more of a continuous neighborhood and less rigid "districts."

And as a previous poster said, if we didn't build a new stadium, we would no longer have the Drillers.

[David]

Wow, you just lost all credibility with me if you think we're trying to copy OKC.  Next you're going to say were going to blast out trenches and make a blue river that winds its way around downtown.

And light rail?  Really?  It wasn't until both Dallas and Houston's metro areas reached sizes around 3 million before they started talking about that.  While I think rail is an awesome idea, it doesn't suit Tulsa currently because downtown doesn't hold the densest employment sectors.  While those two don't either, they're much more dense relatively than Tulsa is.

And also, the arena has turned a profit since it opened in 2008.  In these economic times I consider that a win.  I also consider the fact that I don't have to drive to OKC, KC or Dallas to see a decent concert another win.  It may not ascribe to your 'vision', if it could be called that, but the voters voted on it.  I fail to see how complaining about it now is productive.  That was six years ago.

You could always move somewhere that doesn't like change.

1. A river has already been talked about in the Pearl District.

2. Light rail would attract density, and I'd like to see it go in more areas than just downtown. I'll stand by this until I'm the last one standing, same with bike lanes and a more efficient busing system.

3. You don't have to travel to see a decent concert. I look at the BOk event calendar and am interested in maybe one or two a year, on the flip side I'm attracted to 20-30 concerts a year at the Cain's or Brady. Also, it only benefits a certain segment of the population. These type of things needed to be funded privately. It may have turned a profit since 2008, but in ten years it will be old and out of date. That's how the game goes with these toys.

4. It's my vision, I don't care if anyone agrees. When I go to vote, I'm not voting for what you or your friends want. I'm voting for the view I see the world in. And I'm one of the few that will openly admit that. At the same time, my view usually sees the big picture for everyone. So in 15 years when we have an ugly roll of duct tape on Denver with a defunct WNBA team no longer playing, a dwindling amount of concerts, a minor league hockey team attracting 2K in a 19K arena and your local politicians are begging for more tax money to put duct tape on the duct tape..I'll still be around wondering why we didn't improve our city's public transportation systems.

[David]

The Drillers were done with the fairgrounds. Either Tulsa built them a new stadium downtown or they were moving to Jenks.

Should have let them go then. They aren't the Boston Red Sox or New York Yankees. The days of letting a pro franchise suffocate you with demands are gone.

[dbacks fan]

David, you want a light rail system. I lived in Phoenix while they were building the Metro light rail system at a cost of $1.4 billion and took three years to construct 20 miles of rail as a starter system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_Light_Rail_(Phoenix)

The cost doesn't include the businesses that closed because of the construction.

[David]

David, you want a light rail system. I lived in Phoenix while they were building the Metro light rail system at a cost of $1.4 billion and took three years to construct 20 miles of rail as a starter system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_Light_Rail_(Phoenix)

The cost doesn't include the businesses that closed because of the construction.

And that starter system has far exceeded expected ridership and in September of this year had its busiest month.

[Hoss]

And that starter system has far exceeded expected ridership and in September of this year had its busiest month.

Phoenix metro area: 4.2 million
Tulsa metro area: 900,000

When Tulsa gets to 3 million expect to see talks about light rail.  It's cost counter-productive at this point.