|
Fireworks Ignite Over Gaiety Theatre
Ann Chang
Monday, April 4, 2005
What was scheduled as a routine hearing last
Tuesday before the Zoning Board of Appeal on the determination of
the Gaiety Theatre’s status, turned into a heated confrontation
between the ZBA and proponents to save the theater from demolition,
including four city councilors.
The hearing was scheduled for 12:30 pm. At 1:45
pm, ZBA chairman Robert Shortsleeve announced to the crowd of over
60 people that the board would not hear the appeal. The stunned
audience erupted into cries of “servants for the BRA” and “rump
board.” City councilor Chuck Turner demanded to know why. “This is
an advertised hearing,” he said. “How can you not have the
hearing?”
Shortsleeve stated: “Corporation Counsel has said
we have no standing on this matter.” Ignoring taunts from the crowd,
he tried to continue with other scheduled hearings. It was not to
be. City councilor Maura Hennigan asked: “Where is Counsel’s letter
stating that you have no standing on this matter?”
“There was no letter,” Shortsleeve
declared, further inflaming the Gaiety supporters, who had come to
oppose the theater’s demolition by Kensington Investment Co., the
owner. Kensington wants to demolish the Gaiety to build a 30-story
apartment building, called Kensington Place, along Washington
Street.
Hennigan then led the Gaiety supporters,
including city councilors Chuck Turner and Felix Arroyo, to City
Hall law offices, only to find the doors there locked with two
security guards inside and four others out in the hall. Hennigan
demanded the right to see the counsel responsible for the hearing’s
closure.
The head of security said only councilors would
be allowed inside. Former Corporation Counsel Marita Hopkins
appeared, stating she didn’t know why the hearing was closed. She
promised to find a solution, but that first the proponents had to
return to the hearing area.
Hopkins arranged for the ZBA to hold the hearing
but warned that it wouldn’t make a decision; instead, it would take
the case “under advisement” with a decision made at a latter,
non-specified date.
As the hearing reconvened, Shortsleeve tried to
limit testimony to two speakers but relented when told that five
city councilors were there. Four -- Charles Yancey, Hennigan,
Arroyo, and Turner --were in favor of the Gaiety, and one -- James
Kelly --opposed it. Shortsleeve did limit the non-elected speakers
to two persons from the Chinatown community. Ching-In Chen, of the
Asian American Resource Workshop, testified that the Gaiety is an
integral part of the Chinatown Master Plan and was slated to become
a cultural community center. If de-molished, she said, it would have
to be replaced according to cultural preservation rules in force.
Turner stressed that the demolition represented
ec-onomic expediency over law. “The Inspectional Ser-vices Division
issued a permit for demolition without the required ZBA hearing,” he
said. Arroyo added that the ZBA had a duty to review the master plan
and see that Kensing-ton Place was not in the community’s best
interests. Hennigan tried to get the ZBA to put a stay on the
demolition until its decision was made.
Kelly stated that the development, especially
affordable housing, was good for the neighborhood’s economy.
Matt Kiefer, counsel for the developer, stated
that the demolition approval was in hand in 2001 after it was found
that the Gaiety was no longer a designated theater. “Four city and
three state agencies have approved the [Kensington Place]
development,” he said. “There have been court [land] trials,
appellate and supreme court findings all in favor of [it].” He
agreed with Shortsleeve that the ZBA didn’t have standing in the
matter. “I am confident in the...determination from the Corporation
Counsel”
Shortsleeve moved to send the matter to Counsel
for a “speedy determination.” All voted in favor.
Click here for more News Stories
|