[CTDex]

Originally Posted by Marc Wallace

Yes, I whole-heartedly believe that Bridgeport can sustain another theatre. It will be not only a theatre, but a hub, a cultural center, if you will. It can host anything from shows to corporate functions, meetings all during the "off" hours during the day, and night time functions can be as varied as concerts to stage shows. trust me, this is critical in bringing life and commerce to not only the immediate area, but Bridgeport itself. Seeing a restored old Main St in a city is a wonderful thing, just as seeing an old run-down Main St, with vacant buildings (theatres) is a mighty depressing scene. Negativity tends to breed more negativity. Kind of like graffitti. Put up a new structure & someone tags it, you must remove it immediately or it will breed more & more until very soon it'll make the whole area seem dingey. Whereas build, or rebuild in this case, an old derelict structure and people will gravitate towards it's progress and patronize it. Will there be nay-sayers and detractors? Yep, all day long. The world has no shortage of them. But what I'm saying is that if you breathe life back to that theatre block, it will spread life around it. This is such a no brainer that, as Jay stated, I simply cannot understand why the city is being so blind to it.
Politics aside, and I DO NOT want to get into THAT, I think Ganim can redeem himself to a very large degree if he'd take on the restoration of this block. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't he attempting to do this prior to his <ahem> vacation?
To the people who say this will cost the city $$$, you're right. 100%. But, in the ensuing years, it'll bring in a new attitude, new businesses, new TAXES from those businesses, and most importantly a sense of pride. Just imagine what that place would look like lit up!! I certainly hope to see this in my lifetime!

Because it's not a "no brainer". It's likely that developers considered the cost involved as well as potential profit and steered clear.

Renovation has come up in past years and real estate developers stayed away for good reasons.



Sure it would look nice. But can it really generate the profit necessary to keep it going and do you have evidence to support this belief?


Nobody wants to dump millions into something that turns out to be huge bust.

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by CTDex

Because it's not a "no brainer". It's likely that developers considered the cost involved as well as potential profit and steered clear.

Renovation has come up in past years and real estate developers stayed away for good reasons.



Sure it would look nice. But can it really generate the profit necessary to keep it going and do you have evidence to support this belief?


Nobody wants to dump millions into something that turns out to be huge bust.

The city owns the property and every RFP they have sent out in the last 10 or so years would have kept it that way. It's really the city that has wanted it both ways: control of the property and low enough reno costs. I think that if they could get a developer with rights to the two blank parcels across the street (also city owned) at a reasonable price and 2:1 dollar abatements it'd be a home run for all involved. But the City Council has somewhat dug in it's heels about the remaining properties the city owns in the teardrop thinking they could get top dog dollar for basically husks of buildings. For goodness sake they are dead set on keeping the nearly worthless annex under city auspices, not to mention the BoE building.

As for profitability it'd probably be a lost leader for the city but worth it in the long run.

[Marc Wallace]

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

As for profitability it'd probably be a lost leader for the city but worth it in the long run.

Well and accurately stated......

[CTDex]

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

The city owns the property and every RFP they have sent out in the last 10 or so years would have kept it that way. It's really the city that has wanted it both ways: control of the property and low enough reno costs. I think that if they could get a developer with rights to the two blank parcels across the street (also city owned) at a reasonable price and 2:1 dollar abatements it'd be a home run for all involved. But the City Council has somewhat dug in it's heels about the remaining properties the city owns in the teardrop thinking they could get top dog dollar for basically husks of buildings. For goodness sake they are dead set on keeping the nearly worthless annex under city auspices, not to mention the BoE building.

As for profitability it'd probably be a lost leader for the city but worth it in the long run.

Well you've made my point. The project is clearly not worth the time and effort if the city council is unwilling to play ball and be reasonable.



As for long term profitability it's pure speculation. There are a number of theaters in CT and it's a metro ride into Manhattan where there are other choices. How well are most of them doing?

[Raider111]

Originally Posted by Marc Wallace

To the people who say this will cost the city $$$, you're right. 100%. But, in the ensuing years, it'll bring in a new attitude, new businesses, new TAXES from those businesses, and most importantly a sense of pride. Just imagine what that place would look like lit up!! I certainly hope to see this in my lifetime!

Don't hold your breath. Downtown has more tumbleweeds than people. The east end is far beyond repair.
I've been hearing "it's gonna improve" for over 20 years now or so.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Raider111

Don't hold your breath. Downtown has more tumbleweeds than people. The east end is far beyond repair.
I've been hearing "it's gonna improve" for over 20 years now or so.

That is not true. The area south of Fairfield Avenue is bustling. There are hundreds of new apartments in converted old commercial buildings and a number of excellent restaurants around. North of Fairfield is now being renovated too. That area was on hold because first the state wanted to build the new Juvenal Court there and then by the financial crisis. Now there is construction going on in several of the buildings so in a year or two it will look much different than it does today. Jay

[Raider111]

Originally Posted by JayCT

That is not true. The area south of Fairfield Avenue is bustling. There are hundreds of new apartments in converted old commercial buildings and a number of excellent restaurants around. North of Fairfield is now being renovated too. That area was on hold because first the state wanted to build the new Juvenal Court there and then by the financial crisis. Now there is construction going on in several of the buildings so in a year or two it will look much different than it does today. Jay

The only thing bustling there are tumbleweeds.

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by CTDex

As for long term profitability it's pure speculation. There are a number of theaters in CT and it's a metro ride into Manhattan where there are other choices. How well are most of them doing?

FTC has been expanding like crazy and doing very well. New Haven is still seen as the gatekeeper to Broadway. The other theaters in Bridgeport are only hurting because of the repair costs to the old buildings. Safe to say there's enough demand.

[BPt111]

Good share Bridgeport in late 70s.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrY7QR7dkiY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHSUuVKfGms part 2

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by BPt111

Good share Bridgeport in late 70s.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrY7QR7dkiY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHSUuVKfGms part 2

Lots of hope here. What happened?