New Haven Independent

Posted by: Norton Street | September 17, 2009 3:41 PM

any chance additional renderings, plans, elevations, sections can be made available in the article, or links to where they might be found?

Posted by: anon | September 17, 2009 4:01 PM

Will the state also pay for improvements to surrounding crosswalks and streets, so that students, visitors and residents can walk/bike from their parking lots/transit/homes to the theater without getting run over?

There are many extremely dangerous adjacent intersections such as Trumbull/Lincoln, Audubon/Whitney and Trumbull/Orange? This is a school after all.

Posted by: Walt | September 17, 2009 4:21 PM

The Lincoln Theatre.

Former home of semi-porn movies which we were not allowed to see,

Memorable "How to Take a Bath" movie posters were carefully covered over when the Theatre was used for Assemblies of the old "St. Mary Academy" nearby, between Lincoln and Orange Sts..

Never thought the little dump would be deemed a treasure and its existence celebrated,

Times change, I guess

Posted by: nfjanette | September 17, 2009 4:26 PM

While I support funding for education and the arts, I find myself wondering if I would rather see such a significant sum of money put into the restoration of the Palace Theater. What would be the cost of a basic renovation of the existing footprint of the Little Theater and the internal mechanical systems without the grand tear-down/expansion plans?

Posted by: Alex | September 17, 2009 5:12 PM

I agree. Keep the Little Theater little and renovate the Palace which is near the Arts High School. ECA can use that too and they can walk to it across the Green. I think $6mm is a lot for a little theater which is quaint and historic on its own. We could desperately use a fraction of that $6mm for inner city youth programs and the Q House.

Posted by: jawbone | September 17, 2009 5:30 PM

NFJANETTE,
You are, unfortunately, comparing apples to oranges. The Palace is a large building and literally in ruins. Any money saved by downsizing the Little Theater to a renovation of the existing building would be a drop in the bucket compared to what the Palace would need to get it up and running again.
Don't get me wrong, I love the old Palace. I saw Sonic Youth there and the Pretenders and even Lou Reed once. Great times. It would take a lot of $$$ to bring it back now. The stagehouse and orchestra seating have been open to the elements for years.

Posted by: AndersonScooper | September 17, 2009 6:33 PM

Is the $5.7 Million a grant from the State? Or is it a loan?

In any case, $5.7 Million divided by 10,000 square feet works out to be a whopping $570/sqft!

Yes, it's a better project than the Dowtown Trolley, or the heated bus shelters, but it still seems profligate.

Am I wrong?

Posted by: Greg | September 17, 2009 8:39 PM

I like the idea, but close to $6 million does seem like quite a bit of cash for such a small place.

Posted by: nfjanette | September 17, 2009 10:49 PM

NFJANETTE,
You are, unfortunately, comparing apples to oranges. The Palace is a large building and literally in ruins. Any money saved by downsizing the Little Theater to a renovation of the existing building would be a drop in the bucket compared to what the Palace would need to get it up and running again.

Not in ruins at all! It certainly needs internal work, but five million would go a long way if the focus was live music rather than theater. See this article for more information:

http://www.newhavenadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=9186

Posted by: DrB | September 18, 2009 1:43 AM

Just wondering if the state will also pay for operating expenses as well as the capital expenses they have come up with. This facility is rarely used and other surrounding performing arts venues are starved for cash as it is. Any money that comes from the state at this point should go for programming and staff expenses and not for another underused venue.

Posted by: Bill Saunders | September 18, 2009 2:53 AM

I think these muckety-mucks giving out the grants are drunk on the 'reported' success of the International Festival of Arts and Ideas.

For a mere two million dollars of investment, over 100 thousand happy festival goers injected over 21 Million Dollars of Economic Impact into the pockets of local merchants, through transforming the city into a temporary arts hub.

Just think of the impact that a fully renovated and under-utilized theater will have on the community at large.

I predict 1 billion in smart growth over the long term horizon, which will be a major driver in totally revitalizing an empty block landlorded over by Yale University.

If there is some extra money left over to hire Quinnipiac University to poll an Economic Impact Study out of thin air, I know we can meet all of our special interest goals in these especially troubled times.

Or did I miss something???

Posted by: Julia McFadden | September 18, 2009 9:19 AM

I am excited that this brief article has created such interest in The Little Theatre. Let me address a few of the concerns expressed. First, this facility is hardly underused. During daytime hours it is a performing arts magent highschool serving 300 students each year. The curriculum covers theatre arts, music, and dance, and this facility not only provides a great learning environment but also an intimate performing space. Outside of school hours this facility hosts a whole slew of community events, including the aforementioned Festival of Arts & Ideas. (Did anyone read the article above?) The Neighborhood Music School also performs here, not to mention that the facility is routinely rented out for music concerts and other independent theatre groups. There is currently a lack of quality venues for small groups like this.

As for the cost, the state has quite rigorous assessments that must be done to prove that renovating an old structure is an efficient use of state funding, thus it had to be shown that renovating the structure would cost less than building new, which was definitely the case. That might be hard to believe with a $5.7 million price tag, but the reality is that a brand new state-of-the-art theatre outfitted with modern mechanical systems would cost nearly twice as much. Also, the $5.7 million is the total cost of the project, including approximately $800 thousand for the theatrical equipment that is the backbone of the school curriculum.

I can also assure you that the Little Theatre will remain little. The Theatre itself is only being gutted on the interior to upgrade the mechanical systems, and to retain the historic look of the original structure. What the theatre gains with the new addition is sorely needed support spaces, such as a scene shop, prop and costume storage, and adequate bathrooms. The footprint of this addition is not much bigger than the former additions that are being demolished, but it will have a full basement. By the way, these former additions, built in the 1980's, have not aged as well as the older theatre itself. Why not keep this community landmark functional in the heart of the Arts District?

Posted by: robn | September 18, 2009 9:46 AM

NFJANETTE,

The Advocate article you linked to kindof proves JAWBONE'S point.

The cheaper (Palace Theater) option would cost about $15-$20 million and involves downsizing the auditorium. The $26-$30 million option would mean renovating and expanding it into a pre-Broadway-run theater operated by the Shubert.

The biggest difference between the two is that the little theater has proved its viability and continues to do so. I'd rather spend $6M on improving something that works rather than spending $15-30M on a field of dreams.

Posted by: nfjanette | September 18, 2009 10:30 AM

The Advocate article you linked to kindof proves JAWBONE'S point.

Not if, as I mentioned, the focus of the Palace remained for live music performance. Those estimates given in the article focused on turning into something comparable to the Shubert, which I don't believe is needed or required.

None of that means I dislike the Little Theater. I understand it needs significant work. I'm questioning the scale of the plans and the costs involved.

Posted by: Mister Jones | September 18, 2009 12:37 PM

My fond memory of the Lincoln Theater is a high school field trip from the 'burbs to see Franco Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet, with a glimpse of Olivia Hussey barechested.

I too would love to see the Palace fixed and reopened. A live music venue like Boston's Orpheum or NYC's Beacon would be great. There was some hope when the Toad's folks were poking around in there last summer while their bar was on hiatus. But the fact is that there are way to many venues in our small state, and so many are underutilized while the casinos keep expanding. Isn't Mohegan opening a House of Blues with yet another mid-size venue?

Oakdale [whatever it's branded now--Chevrolet?] is dark half the time. Shubert in New Haven books some musical acts, although I think the Palace is a better house for music. Fairfield Theatre Company seems to be booking lots of shows in their house and the Klein in Bridgeport. So are the folks at Infinity Hall way up in Norfolk. I'd rather see all those shows in our fair city, but we need to face economic and market reality. I'd would also go to Toad's more often if they booked more acts I like, and had tables and chairs, and a menu with nice bar food, like the Iron Horse in Northampton, Massachusetts, but that's another story.

Despite the surplus of venues, including several relatively new Yale performance spaces, it sounds like the Little fills a niche. Yes, it's a lot of money, but construction is incredibly expensive, so I'm not shocked.

Posted by: Bill Saunders | September 18, 2009 1:47 PM

One of the great benefits of the Little Theatre is the access the community has to use a beautiful performance space for a reasonable price (around $650, which includes a sound/lighting tech).

After this renovation, does this reasonable access remain, or did we just upscale ourselves out of public affordability??

Posted by: hmm | September 19, 2009 8:13 PM

nfjanette: I agree, seeing as the cheapest option listed was 15-20 million, I think any other numbers are suspect.

I personally think this sounds great. I'd like to mention that one use was neglected in mentioning the many uses it serves--
in addition to the 300 students who study music & dance here, the theater also serves twice weekly to teach circus arts to some 30 odd children. An excellent addition to their curriculum--balance, self-control, & teamwork are all taught here for 2 hours a week. Students who would never think to enter a dance class learn how to walk on stilts & support each other. Most of the practices require a spotter who works closely with the student to ensure their mutual safety.

The venue has also had silent movies from the 1930s with exceptional local musicians playing the score. Truly unique & a real showcase of New Haven's talents, a shame that Saunders did not notice this.

I've said this before--it's important to support the arts. While it's valid to raise the question about the price, I think it's important to not pillage other arts festivals & showcases if we want our own projects to succeed.

Look at a city like Montreal where they invest heavily in all art--that didn't come across by smaller venues attacking larger ones, that came about after the larger festivals & venues were supported by the government.

It must be frustrating to put on the excellent Ideat Village each year & not see state funding, but part of that is our tendency to naysay arts spending in general. Instead of approaching it as a zero sum game, I encourage Saunders & others (like the Little Theater!) to reach out for what money is available.

When people see the benefits they will be more inclined to put more money out there. In the meantime, sniping other arts festivals, no matter how eloquently, will not fix the very real problem that the arts faces in CT--they are under-funded & poorly supported.

Posted by: Bill Saunders | September 21, 2009 2:36 PM

Hmmmmmmmmmm,

I think the Little Theatre is an awesome venue, that is viable without a 6 million dollar redo.

Believe me, I am in no way frustrated with receiving no state or city money for Ideat Village. If we wanted grants, we could surely qualify, however, there are usually caveats that undermine our free-wheeling independence. For example, we could have applied for a Mayor's Challenge Grant, but we would need to put "sponsored by the city of new haven" on our literature. Not Happening.

That said, I encourage all of you would be community organizers out there to eschew drinking from the public trough. Much can be done with little, especially with the right philosophy.