The arts make a significant economic contribution to our economy. According to the Americans for the Arts, in 2010 nonprofit arts and culture organizations contributed $61.1 billion into the economy. A large portion of this can be attributed to the resounding impact arts organizations have in their communities. Without the presence of arts opportunities, many business districts would not flourish and be as financially viable as they are today. Here are three successful examples of arts integration in business improvement districts to examine.
The first is the downtown Los Angeles Arts District BID. The area was officially established as a BID in 2005. The area is populated with open working spaces, live-work lofts, restaurants and retail shops. Funding for the BID was established to enhance safety, improve maintenance, and support other special programs. The area has become a bustling creative hub, and attracts many artists due to the loft spaces and inexpensive rent. There are currently 2 performing arts centers, 12 galleries and over 30 artists working in the Arts District.
http://artsdistrictla.com/index.tpl
A second example of a successful BID is the Ithaca Downtown Partnership, formed in 1997. The organization primarily focuses on Business Retention & Development, Marketing & Membership Services, Government Relations & Environmental Infrastructure, and Special Events. The organization works to preserve the downtown region as the central hub for the city’s economic activity. There are over 20 art galleries in the downtown area, an annual art exhibition, concerts, and theatre productions throughout the year.
Lastly, a more recent example is the Downtown Arlington, Texas BID, formed in 2010. The initiatives of the BID fostered 8.3 million square feet of office spaces, 1 million square feet of retail space and 8,000 residential units. Their four areas of concentration include Marketing, Economic Development, Security and Beautification. The downtown area has 3 music hall venues, a museum of art, library, and events center.
All of these examples, and the ones we discussed in class, demonstrate how well the format of a public-private partnership supports the development of cities’ commercial districts. BIDs generate and retain businesses, form new jobs, and improve quality of life for those using the district. Incorporating arts opportunities into the redevelopment strategy assists in creating a cultural identity and also serves as an attendance generator for the district.
Moving forward, this research has triggered many questions proposed for further discussion.
1. How imperative is it for a city to establish a Business Improvement District, or can stand alone non-profits and other organizations make similar improvements to a community? a. One example organization is the Avenue of the Arts in Philadelphia. http://www.avenueofthearts.org/default.asp
2. A lot of the examples I looked into incorporated arts as part of the master plan. Is it possible for arts opportunities to be the driving change for the BID?
3. If arts and cultural were placed at the forefront of BIDs how would this differentiate from strategies of Creative Placemaking? Creative placemaking, as defined by the NEA is, when partners from public, private, non-profit and community sectors strategically shape the physical and cultural character of a neighborhood, town, city or region around arts and cultural activities.
4. Should the BID model only be restricted to downtown areas, or can it expand to more populated suburban sectors?
Despite some admirable features, the BID model leaves a bad taste in my mouth. First, it inevitably calls up the soho effect (http://www.thelmagazine.com/newyork/re-examining-the-soho-effect/Content?oid=1689324&storyPage=1) whereby artists displace some 'undesirable' social class, make a neighborhood 'trendy' and 'liveable'. Those artists are then displaced by a more affluent social class. Art is used as a tool for gentrification. For whom does this improve the quality of life? The wealthy are still wealthy, they're just in a different neighborhood. The same is true of the poor. And of the artists. They are forced out by rising real-estate prices and set about 'improving' a new area. Who, exactly, does this help? My second concern is about the perception of the utility of art in society. I do understand the need to speak the language of business to make art appealing to business people and urban planners, but when we first present art as a tool for economic development the true value of art to elevate our humanity is seen as a fringe benefit, if it is seen at all. I don't have a solution to this. It's a bit of a catch 22. If we can't bring art into societal prominence, art will never achieve its full power to enrich our lives and enlighten our culture, but if we bring art into societal prominence by depicting it as a economic driver, art may not be able to transcend that label and will never achieve its full power.
Kate, your last point about using art as a tool for economic development is something that came up a LOT as we tackled our systems project. When the economic argument is the only one that most funders will lend any credence to these days, how do you speak to it while still emphasizing the importance of the art as art? Kelsey mentions Creative Placemaking above, and that is basically where we found our "answer". A big part of this is involving the community in your efforts. When you're planning to implement major change in a community, it benefits everyone involved to ask the people living there what they want. For example, when the Sprout Fund put up the mural, Lend Me Your Ears, in East Liberty, they took the time to ask residents what they wanted there, what they wanted to look like, and what it should represent. I won't deny that a certain amount of gentrification has occurred there (HELLOOO Target!), but successful public artworks like this mural foster stronger Community Attachment, which makes it more likely that residents will stay put, therefore contributing to the local economy.
Although this is a visual art example, I feel like the same sort of thing could apply to the performing arts, as well. I'll use Artisphere as a "for-instance" here. From their website : " [Arlington County has a] long history of strong support for the arts and recognition for imaginative advancement, sound management and strong community participation in all aspects of governance...The opening ultimately represented forty years of desire on the part of the community for a major arts center that would showcase Arlington's finest arts organizations..." This was part of a BID, and it seems as though the community had a say in what they wanted to put in the space. (Although, I am admittedly not incredibly familiar with this space...perhaps Brett has some deeper insight here.) Regardless, when you can get residents invested in the outcome of a public project, it seems they would be more likely to help it achieve success by purchasing tickets and attending events.
I think that this sort of process is the only way that we will be able to bring art into "societal prominence" - by involving people in these early planning stages and getting community investment from the outset. I'm not saying that they should be choosing all of the programming or anything, but we could at least ask them if they are interested. What is the sense of putting something in a place where there is no demand for it? And the economic benefits occur after we've achieved this sense of community pride and attachment, which won't happen without investment and programming that is relevant and compelling to the residents of that community.
Marissa, I'm glad you brought up East Liberty and community involvement. I just finished a case for support for Mary's fundraising class for the Kelly Strayhorn Theater. I was really impressed by the extensive community meetings that were held to get feedback from residents as well as businesses in forming an action plan for East Liberty. Of course, these processes always become skewed by those who have the time or desire to get involved, but still the final 2010 Community Plan document that was developed (http://www.eastliberty.org/community-planning/plans) seems to reflect the true concerns and ideas expressed in those meetings. Whether or not they are implemented as the community would hope is another issue to be seen.
Gentrification is definitely a concern (as you mentioned, Target) though according to the report, the community actually wanted a chain store to anchor the district. Who knows what part of the community that came from, but it did at least provide a lot of jobs and is close so residents don't have to travel so far.
But, there was a story that concerned me last year regarding the Shadow Lounge (check out the full story from the City Paper: http://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/out-of-the-shadows-east-liberty-club-receives-unusual-complaints/Content?oid=1556576). They started receiving weird letters suggesting that their business was at risk of being shut down. The general consensus is that Walnut Capital was using their connections to make up reasons to send Shadow Lounge threatening letters. They are building a huge new apartment building right across the street, though it won't open for quite some time.
What concerns me is that the Shadow Lounge, as the article states, has been a pioneer in the revitalization of East Liberty and its art scene. East Liberty needs art, and it also needs more housing. What happens when the big for-profit management company has the power to shove the small art presenters out?
To bring it back to the partnership issue, the ELDI has been around for decades trying to bring East Liberty back to its 1950s glory. As Eric mentioned in class, they have also used this power to buy up a ton of property so that independent developers can't take it, even if it would mean more stability and faster improvements. Pittsburgh being the old school nepitistic town it is, you know there's a web of money and connections and special deals under all of this. On the outside it might look shiny and pretty, but underneath it's just dirty money exchanging hands.
Like Kate said, I don't have an answer to fix the gentrification problem. Involving the existing community as much as possible is a really important part of it, but even then it's no guarantee that what the community wants will survive what developers can do.
This whole conversation has made me think about the ELDI and I am glad Katie brought it up. I think that the Community Plan of 1999 and 2010 have done more good than harm to the area of East Liberty. Although, the area is slowly seeing the effects of gentrification, it is also seeing an improved economy with residents having access to jobs, as well as opportunities to engage in the community. The eight pillars of their 2010 task force plan were to develop: safe neighborhoods, better housing, workforce, a commercial core, small businesses, parks & recreation, youth engagement, and healthy community members. It has seen improvements in these areas according to the extensive report published in 2010 by the ELDI (although, I am aware they are presenting their own findings of their own work, however the data is fairly impressive). That being said, I don’t think that these plans were intended push people out, but rather help create opportunities in an area that was once the most vibrant part of Pittsburgh. It is important to remember that the people of the neighborhood helped develop these plans, as Katie mentioned.
One aspect that could be more robust in the future is youth engagement in the arts and I think that this is where the Plans fell short. Each of the pillars listed above had concrete deliverables that were evident from the work done in the past 23 years. The 2010 Plan mentions the arts in conjunction with youth in very general terms but there are no hard plans for the future. The reason may be that it is hard to put an economic value on youth engagement in the arts. During my Strategic Presentations Class, I proposed that a Systems Project could be molded around a feasibility study for creating a youth geared arts center in East Liberty. In my opinion, this could be marketable to companies like ELDI and Mosites because it shows that they are truly vested in the residents of East Liberty. Plus I don't think anyone would contest that there is a positive correlation between arts involvement and educational achievement, especially for at risk youth.
So ... I completely agree with Kate, and even though I am a proponent of the arts, I approach the usage arts as a means of "community revitalization" with skepticism. Quite honestly, I feel like arts are used as a fine sugar coating to cover the secret ambitions of uprooting a group of peoples. In order to do this, you must first place a art gallery or a theater there so that people of higher socio-economic standing will feel comfortable enough to venture into “the hood” to take a bite, and then the swarming begins.
In DC its particularly disturbing, The minority owned business surrounding Howard on Georgia Avenue, U street, and 14th street have been displaced and in some cases closed and it has compromised the culture of the environment. You can argue that those locations were “dangerous” and that they have profited from a glittery makeover, but the reality is, hundreds of people who established their lives in those areas, can no longer afford to sustain.
I admire the Kelly-Strayhorn for what it is trying to do in East Liberty. Instead of plopping itself in an urban area and luring in a new population, it has tried to cultivate localized art forms and construct programming that is of interest to the community that has always called East Liberty home. Unfortunately, the Kelly-Strayhorn has not been able to have the overwhelming success of places like the Studio Theatre in DC, but it is my personal belief that the investment in arts education programs can help to bridge this gap.
I believe arts education programs can be used as a long-term investment model as well as a way to enter a community without compromising the dignity of the culture that is already present. By reaching out into the community and undertaking programs that help to create an understanding and appreciation for the arts will help to cultivate a local audience that will patronize the facility for generations.
The gentrification effect of arts revitalization / BID is an interesting catch 22. If you look into WHY the bid was started it usually comes down to real estate values/economic factors/safety, etc. The only successful BID project without gentrification I have witnessed involved significant diverse income housing options. Interestingly, in the end, the people who lived there before ended up moving anyway -- as they just didn't feel like it was their neighborhood anymore (lots of new around).
Arlington is an interesting study of peculiarity. I would say that strict zoning and BID have helped it succeed -- but the organizations are still struggling.
Finally, you could have a goal for supporting artists and push back at big corporate america . . . where does that position the tax floor that BID is really trying to lift? A question - not a comment.
To comment on both Kelsey's post and Kate's response, I think BID models vary in their success due to the cities in which they are implemented and the city planners/politicians who manage and promote them. I don't want that to seem like a cop-out answer, but it's sort of a grey issue because even though positive intentions facilitate the development projects certain groups always end up getting burned. Being from New Jersey, I have slowly witnessed the "re-birth" of Newark, the state's largest city. However, at least in Newark, the BID model has taken a long time to yield positive impacts. NJPAC, which was built back in 1997 for about $187 million, was part of a multi-year development project to help "unite" people from different backgrounds and bring economic stimulus back to the crime and drug-laden city. To answer one of Kelsey's questions, I think arts organizations, if coordinated well, can implement their own stimulus models on a smaller scale. NJPAC's construction was also met by the construction of a minor league baseball stadium and the refurbishment of local parks and residential units. NJPAC is definitely not the equivalent of Pittsburgh's August Wilson Center, but it is also not anywhere close to challenging Lincoln Center as a premiere destination for artistic performances (as perhaps not-so-clever marketers once thought). NJPAC is trying to do more to develop the surrounding area by proposing the construction of a high-rise luxury tower, but almost 7 years later the funds have not been secured. Meanwhile, the focus of Newark's re-development shifted to the construction of the Prudential Center, a sports venue that has attracted large audiences for big name events, yet whose owners were able to get away with not paying years of their rent because of the Mayor's office's ineptitude at analyzing contracts. In short, I think the BID model can be separated from gentrification, yet on a small scale. I think the focus of the BID model should do more to include local residents. Perhaps where this model fails is when urban planners bypass residents and immediately go into talks with developers and large franchises. Meanwhile, the demand and success of these new development projects is always unsure because poverty and gang violence are problems in Newark that simply cannot be changed by the construction of a building; if art is to be used as a unifying tool, diverse participants cannot and should not be excluded from the start.
There has been a lot of discussion here about the issue of gentrification, which is definitely an issue with the BID model. Eric had also mentioned the lack of youth engagement in the arts. I think the Hill Academy Dance Theatre (HDAT - http://www.5678hdat.org/history.html), started by a MAM, is relevant here because even though it is not in a BID and is not part of any BID plans, it sort of tackles those first two issues I mentioned. The HDAT "developed out of Ayisha Morgan-Lee’s passion to insure that children, ages 3 to 18 years old, who want to dance, but would not otherwise have an opportunity to dance would be able to dance with HDAT".
So, here, the HDAT is engaging youth in the community, and is getting rid of the elitism with their art. Although this is more of a school and less of a professional organization, it would be interesting to put something like this (in any art form) along side a professional organization in a BID. So, the residents will actually be directly integrated into the new businesses/organizations in their own community.
I believe that designating art and cultural district as part of BID is truly effective to make a huge impact in the region at the initial stage of booming arts and culture up. Since it involves public and private sector partnership, arts and cultural district gets infrastructure done by government effort while benefiting from enhanced transportation, public safety, and streetscape. Thereby the district can build public awareness in order to meet critical mass keeping financial sustainability.
According to the paper, Creative Placemaking by Ann Markusen and Anne Gadwa, past efforts to nurture artistic experience to the community were designed as stand-alone edifices or complexes with little integration with street life or art-related businesses. However, over the past two decades, under the rubric of “the creative city,” arts, community, and civic leaders have joined in nurturing a larger portfolio of smaller spaces for arts and culture. (http://www.nea.gov/pub/CreativePlacemaking-Paper.pdf)
Thinking of the “Multiplier effect,” which indicates the creation of a series of additional economic effect from a single activity, I believe that arts and cultural district with smaller spaces for arts and culture is more beneficial for multiple parties than a stand-alone, mega institution. The district increases floating population in the area, resulting in increase in retail sales and creation of restaurants. Also, by promoting smaller arts organizations in the area altogether, it helps smaller organizations to gain awareness from potential audiences who visited the district.
As Kate mentioned, the use of art as a tool for economic development can be harm to the arts. Yet I also believe we can think differently: the arts can be benefited from the economic development of the region. More population means more potential audience, and more audience means more concrete base to promote diverse art scene in the region. In other words, art can’t stand alone, but it cooperates with the municipalities, developers, and the community. In this sense, the “Creative Placemaking” concept describes well how the arts and culture can contribute to the economic development as well as how the creative places act as incubators of arts and cultural enterprise.
In addition, regarding the question 4 Kelsey posed, “Should the BID model only be restricted to downtown areas, or can it expand to more populated suburban sectors?” I want to share an answer from Kevin McMahon, Pittsburgh Cultural Trust when I asked a similar question if PCT has any plan to expand this cultural district size-wise or to other areas of the city. He said, “In order to expand the district in terms of area, it needs to reach critical mass. We would rather focus more on condensing arts and cultural environment within the existing district.” It was another difficulty I faced when thinking about accessibility issue, but I believe that this could be resolved in another way such as Quantum Theatre, which performs in the community all around the region.
I want to add another model to the discussion which emerged in several German cities during the last 10 years and is slightly different to the BID model: the creative cluster or creative park. Creative clusters/parks are normally located in upcoming neighborhoods, oftentimes with a history of industrial usage. The city buys this unused space and buildings (if it doesn’t own it already…) and rents it to newly rising for-profit companies and non-profit organizations which are all related to the cultural industry and the arts in one way or another. Normally the rent for the offices and studios is very, very low. Typical renters for creative clusters/parks can be dance clubs, (graphic) designers, music studio owners, photographers as well as theatres or music groups that need rehearsal space. Oftentimes the for-profit companies have to leave the cluster after a few years to make space for new organizations. There are several reasons why cities subsidize such kind of urbanization projects. One of them is already mentioned in several posts above: The city wants to change the image of unattractive neighborhoods through the arts and to make them more attractive for profitable businesses and wealthy residents. Furthermore, creative clusters/parks always generate new jobs and are a good marketing tool for the city. But in addition to that, there is another reason behind these projects: The city wants to concentrate all the creative potential at one place because they expect positive exchanges between the organizations through the physical closeness. But in return to their rental support, the city expects especially the non-profit companies to find new ways of financing their organization through the new partnerships. As a result, the general monetary support through the city can be lowered. Therefore, creative clusters/parks are oftentimes just a shift of subsidiaries from the cultural budget of a city to the urban development budget.
There are a lot of really interesting points here. While Americans for the Arts does make the claim that the arts play a significant role in the economy, there are several caveats to that claim. As Marissa alluded to, that connection is very indirect – the impact of the arts on communities can most directly be felt through community development and creative place making. While there is legitimate skepticism above about the arts' involvement in development, I do believe that it is a necessity in the current age.
To address Kate's concern about the arts being used as a utility tool, I believe that the two can go hand-in-hand – and with the current economic situation, they must. Arts organizations are where they are (going under, experiencing all sorts of yucky financial problems) largely because they have refused to change. I would not be slaving away at the Heinz College as a MAM if I did not believe in the inherent values of the arts, but I think that it is time for us as artists/art lovers/arts managers, to think about how artistic integrity can be maintained in work, while still achieving a social or societal purpose. In order for those who are not wealthy to have access to the arts, we must make them available in practical ways. This is not an age when people have tons of extra cash floating around – using the arts to engage communities is a way to make the arts accessible to those who do not have large budgets (monetary or time) to ingest the arts.
In response to Ariel's concern about redevelopment always displacing people, I agree that this is a tragic effect of what developers, et all have deemed to be improvement. There are, however, examples of places where development has occurred without outsiders infiltrating an area (and I believe that this model could be successfully used elsewhere). The Dudley Street Neighborhood in Boston is one such example (http://www.dsni.org). Also, Braddock, PA just down the road has and is doing a spectacular job with this, and is incorporating a lot of arts development (http://www.15104.cc). Brett also makes a good point about successful redevelopment happening surrounding mixed use housing. EVERYONE! TAKE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT! IT IS AMAZING AND MATT MEHALIK IS A SUPER HERO!
From what I can tell, a business improvement district encourages business diversity, which is a definite sign of a healthy economy. Now, I know that seems like it has nothing to do with the art, but it really does. If the economy is healthy (and there are lots of kinds of businesses), there is work for artists, as well as for people with all sorts of skill sets. In addition, business diversity encourages community participation in an area. With only an art gallery or a theater, no one is going to want to come to an area. With an art gallery, a theater, a few restaurants, a few bars, etc., people will be much more likely to be out and about, support businesses, and support the arts. There is a nice trickle-down effect from local business into arts organizations.
Finally, a BID, I think, really fosters a sense of cohesiveness. The Knight Soul of the Community study found that people value social offerings (including the arts) as the number one reason they are attached to a place, and the aesthetics of a place as the number three reason they are attached to a community. There is a place for the arts in development and redevelopment, we just have to figure out how to best include everyone and keep our motives pure. Of course, this is very idealistic, but hell, I like idealism! There are good examples of these things happening not so far away from us, and i don't think that we have to take an extreme one way or the other. Times are a-changing, and the arts might have to bend and shake a little to keep up. I love the thought of creative place making as a place for the arts to thrive.
The arts make a significant economic contribution to our economy. According to the Americans for the Arts, in 2010 nonprofit arts and culture organizations contributed $61.1 billion into the economy. A large portion of this can be attributed to the resounding impact arts organizations have in their communities. Without the presence of arts opportunities, many business districts would not flourish and be as financially viable as they are today. Here are three successful examples of arts integration in business improvement districts to examine.
ReplyDeleteThe first is the downtown Los Angeles Arts District BID. The area was officially established as a BID in 2005. The area is populated with open working spaces, live-work lofts, restaurants and retail shops. Funding for the BID was established to enhance safety, improve maintenance, and support other special programs. The area has become a bustling creative hub, and attracts many artists due to the loft spaces and inexpensive rent. There are currently 2 performing arts centers, 12 galleries and over 30 artists working in the Arts District.
http://artsdistrictla.com/index.tpl
A second example of a successful BID is the Ithaca Downtown Partnership, formed in 1997. The organization primarily focuses on Business Retention & Development, Marketing & Membership Services, Government Relations & Environmental Infrastructure, and Special Events. The organization works to preserve the downtown region as the central hub for the city’s economic activity. There are over 20 art galleries in the downtown area, an annual art exhibition, concerts, and theatre productions throughout the year.
http://www.downtownithaca.com/content/category/business-development.html
Lastly, a more recent example is the Downtown Arlington, Texas BID, formed in 2010. The initiatives of the BID fostered 8.3 million square feet of office spaces, 1 million square feet of retail space and 8,000 residential units. Their four areas of concentration include Marketing, Economic Development, Security and Beautification. The downtown area has 3 music hall venues, a museum of art, library, and events center.
http://downtownarlington.org/about/business-improvement-district/
All of these examples, and the ones we discussed in class, demonstrate how well the format of a public-private partnership supports the development of cities’ commercial districts. BIDs generate and retain businesses, form new jobs, and improve quality of life for those using the district. Incorporating arts opportunities into the redevelopment strategy assists in creating a cultural identity and also serves as an attendance generator for the district.
Moving forward, this research has triggered many questions proposed for further discussion.
1. How imperative is it for a city to establish a Business Improvement District, or can stand alone non-profits and other organizations make similar improvements to a community?
a. One example organization is the Avenue of the Arts in Philadelphia. http://www.avenueofthearts.org/default.asp
2. A lot of the examples I looked into incorporated arts as part of the master plan. Is it possible for arts opportunities to be the driving change for the BID?
3. If arts and cultural were placed at the forefront of BIDs how would this differentiate from strategies of Creative Placemaking? Creative placemaking, as defined by the NEA is, when partners from public, private, non-profit and community sectors strategically shape the physical and cultural character of a neighborhood, town, city or region around arts and cultural activities.
4. Should the BID model only be restricted to downtown areas, or can it expand to more populated suburban sectors?
Despite some admirable features, the BID model leaves a bad taste in my mouth. First, it inevitably calls up the soho effect (http://www.thelmagazine.com/newyork/re-examining-the-soho-effect/Content?oid=1689324&storyPage=1) whereby artists displace some 'undesirable' social class, make a neighborhood 'trendy' and 'liveable'. Those artists are then displaced by a more affluent social class. Art is used as a tool for gentrification. For whom does this improve the quality of life? The wealthy are still wealthy, they're just in a different neighborhood. The same is true of the poor. And of the artists. They are forced out by rising real-estate prices and set about 'improving' a new area. Who, exactly, does this help?
ReplyDeleteMy second concern is about the perception of the utility of art in society. I do understand the need to speak the language of business to make art appealing to business people and urban planners, but when we first present art as a tool for economic development the true value of art to elevate our humanity is seen as a fringe benefit, if it is seen at all. I don't have a solution to this. It's a bit of a catch 22. If we can't bring art into societal prominence, art will never achieve its full power to enrich our lives and enlighten our culture, but if we bring art into societal prominence by depicting it as a economic driver, art may not be able to transcend that label and will never achieve its full power.
Kate, your last point about using art as a tool for economic development is something that came up a LOT as we tackled our systems project. When the economic argument is the only one that most funders will lend any credence to these days, how do you speak to it while still emphasizing the importance of the art as art? Kelsey mentions Creative Placemaking above, and that is basically where we found our "answer". A big part of this is involving the community in your efforts. When you're planning to implement major change in a community, it benefits everyone involved to ask the people living there what they want. For example, when the Sprout Fund put up the mural, Lend Me Your Ears, in East Liberty, they took the time to ask residents what they wanted there, what they wanted to look like, and what it should represent. I won't deny that a certain amount of gentrification has occurred there (HELLOOO Target!), but successful public artworks like this mural foster stronger Community Attachment, which makes it more likely that residents will stay put, therefore contributing to the local economy.
DeleteAlthough this is a visual art example, I feel like the same sort of thing could apply to the performing arts, as well. I'll use Artisphere as a "for-instance" here. From their website : " [Arlington County has a] long history of strong support for the arts and recognition for imaginative advancement, sound management and strong community participation in all aspects of governance...The opening ultimately represented forty years of desire on the part of the community for a major arts center that would showcase Arlington's finest arts organizations..." This was part of a BID, and it seems as though the community had a say in what they wanted to put in the space. (Although, I am admittedly not incredibly familiar with this space...perhaps Brett has some deeper insight here.) Regardless, when you can get residents invested in the outcome of a public project, it seems they would be more likely to help it achieve success by purchasing tickets and attending events.
I think that this sort of process is the only way that we will be able to bring art into "societal prominence" - by involving people in these early planning stages and getting community investment from the outset. I'm not saying that they should be choosing all of the programming or anything, but we could at least ask them if they are interested. What is the sense of putting something in a place where there is no demand for it? And the economic benefits occur after we've achieved this sense of community pride and attachment, which won't happen without investment and programming that is relevant and compelling to the residents of that community.
Marissa, I'm glad you brought up East Liberty and community involvement. I just finished a case for support for Mary's fundraising class for the Kelly Strayhorn Theater. I was really impressed by the extensive community meetings that were held to get feedback from residents as well as businesses in forming an action plan for East Liberty. Of course, these processes always become skewed by those who have the time or desire to get involved, but still the final 2010 Community Plan document that was developed (http://www.eastliberty.org/community-planning/plans) seems to reflect the true concerns and ideas expressed in those meetings. Whether or not they are implemented as the community would hope is another issue to be seen.
DeleteGentrification is definitely a concern (as you mentioned, Target) though according to the report, the community actually wanted a chain store to anchor the district. Who knows what part of the community that came from, but it did at least provide a lot of jobs and is close so residents don't have to travel so far.
But, there was a story that concerned me last year regarding the Shadow Lounge (check out the full story from the City Paper: http://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/out-of-the-shadows-east-liberty-club-receives-unusual-complaints/Content?oid=1556576). They started receiving weird letters suggesting that their business was at risk of being shut down. The general consensus is that Walnut Capital was using their connections to make up reasons to send Shadow Lounge threatening letters. They are building a huge new apartment building right across the street, though it won't open for quite some time.
What concerns me is that the Shadow Lounge, as the article states, has been a pioneer in the revitalization of East Liberty and its art scene. East Liberty needs art, and it also needs more housing. What happens when the big for-profit management company has the power to shove the small art presenters out?
To bring it back to the partnership issue, the ELDI has been around for decades trying to bring East Liberty back to its 1950s glory. As Eric mentioned in class, they have also used this power to buy up a ton of property so that independent developers can't take it, even if it would mean more stability and faster improvements. Pittsburgh being the old school nepitistic town it is, you know there's a web of money and connections and special deals under all of this. On the outside it might look shiny and pretty, but underneath it's just dirty money exchanging hands.
Like Kate said, I don't have an answer to fix the gentrification problem. Involving the existing community as much as possible is a really important part of it, but even then it's no guarantee that what the community wants will survive what developers can do.
This whole conversation has made me think about the ELDI and I am glad Katie brought it up. I think that the Community Plan of 1999 and 2010 have done more good than harm to the area of East Liberty. Although, the area is slowly seeing the effects of gentrification, it is also seeing an improved economy with residents having access to jobs, as well as opportunities to engage in the community. The eight pillars of their 2010 task force plan were to develop: safe neighborhoods, better housing, workforce, a commercial core, small businesses, parks & recreation, youth engagement, and healthy community members. It has seen improvements in these areas according to the extensive report published in 2010 by the ELDI (although, I am aware they are presenting their own findings of their own work, however the data is fairly impressive). That being said, I don’t think that these plans were intended push people out, but rather help create opportunities in an area that was once the most vibrant part of Pittsburgh. It is important to remember that the people of the neighborhood helped develop these plans, as Katie mentioned.
DeleteOne aspect that could be more robust in the future is youth engagement in the arts and I think that this is where the Plans fell short. Each of the pillars listed above had concrete deliverables that were evident from the work done in the past 23 years. The 2010 Plan mentions the arts in conjunction with youth in very general terms but there are no hard plans for the future. The reason may be that it is hard to put an economic value on youth engagement in the arts. During my Strategic Presentations Class, I proposed that a Systems Project could be molded around a feasibility study for creating a youth geared arts center in East Liberty. In my opinion, this could be marketable to companies like ELDI and Mosites because it shows that they are truly vested in the residents of East Liberty. Plus I don't think anyone would contest that there is a positive correlation between arts involvement and educational achievement, especially for at risk youth.
Source: http://www.eastliberty.org/sites/default/files/plan/files/Community%20Plan%20Screen.pdf
http://www.nea.gov/research/arts-at-risk-youth.pdf
So ... I completely agree with Kate, and even though I am a proponent of the arts, I approach the usage arts as a means of "community revitalization" with skepticism. Quite honestly, I feel like arts are used as a fine sugar coating to cover the secret ambitions of uprooting a group of peoples. In order to do this, you must first place a art gallery or a theater there so that people of higher socio-economic standing will feel comfortable enough to venture into “the hood” to take a bite, and then the swarming begins.
DeleteIn DC its particularly disturbing, The minority owned business surrounding Howard on Georgia Avenue, U street, and 14th street have been displaced and in some cases closed and it has compromised the culture of the environment. You can argue that those locations were “dangerous” and that they have profited from a glittery makeover, but the reality is, hundreds of people who established their lives in those areas, can no longer afford to sustain.
I admire the Kelly-Strayhorn for what it is trying to do in East Liberty. Instead of plopping itself in an urban area and luring in a new population, it has tried to cultivate localized art forms and construct programming that is of interest to the community that has always called East Liberty home. Unfortunately, the Kelly-Strayhorn has not been able to have the overwhelming success of places like the Studio Theatre in DC, but it is my personal belief that the investment in arts education programs can help to bridge this gap.
I believe arts education programs can be used as a long-term investment model as well as a way to enter a community without compromising the dignity of the culture that is already present. By reaching out into the community and undertaking programs that help to create an understanding and appreciation for the arts will help to cultivate a local audience that will patronize the facility for generations.
The gentrification effect of arts revitalization / BID is an interesting catch 22. If you look into WHY the bid was started it usually comes down to real estate values/economic factors/safety, etc. The only successful BID project without gentrification I have witnessed involved significant diverse income housing options. Interestingly, in the end, the people who lived there before ended up moving anyway -- as they just didn't feel like it was their neighborhood anymore (lots of new around).
DeleteArlington is an interesting study of peculiarity. I would say that strict zoning and BID have helped it succeed -- but the organizations are still struggling.
Finally, you could have a goal for supporting artists and push back at big corporate america . . . where does that position the tax floor that BID is really trying to lift? A question - not a comment.
To comment on both Kelsey's post and Kate's response, I think BID models vary in their success due to the cities in which they are implemented and the city planners/politicians who manage and promote them. I don't want that to seem like a cop-out answer, but it's sort of a grey issue because even though positive intentions facilitate the development projects certain groups always end up getting burned. Being from New Jersey, I have slowly witnessed the "re-birth" of Newark, the state's largest city. However, at least in Newark, the BID model has taken a long time to yield positive impacts. NJPAC, which was built back in 1997 for about $187 million, was part of a multi-year development project to help "unite" people from different backgrounds and bring economic stimulus back to the crime and drug-laden city. To answer one of Kelsey's questions, I think arts organizations, if coordinated well, can implement their own stimulus models on a smaller scale. NJPAC's construction was also met by the construction of a minor league baseball stadium and the refurbishment of local parks and residential units. NJPAC is definitely not the equivalent of Pittsburgh's August Wilson Center, but it is also not anywhere close to challenging Lincoln Center as a premiere destination for artistic performances (as perhaps not-so-clever marketers once thought). NJPAC is trying to do more to develop the surrounding area by proposing the construction of a high-rise luxury tower, but almost 7 years later the funds have not been secured. Meanwhile, the focus of Newark's re-development shifted to the construction of the Prudential Center, a sports venue that has attracted large audiences for big name events, yet whose owners were able to get away with not paying years of their rent because of the Mayor's office's ineptitude at analyzing contracts. In short, I think the BID model can be separated from gentrification, yet on a small scale. I think the focus of the BID model should do more to include local residents. Perhaps where this model fails is when urban planners bypass residents and immediately go into talks with developers and large franchises. Meanwhile, the demand and success of these new development projects is always unsure because poverty and gang violence are problems in Newark that simply cannot be changed by the construction of a building; if art is to be used as a unifying tool, diverse participants cannot and should not be excluded from the start.
ReplyDeleteThere has been a lot of discussion here about the issue of gentrification, which is definitely an issue with the BID model. Eric had also mentioned the lack of youth engagement in the arts. I think the Hill Academy Dance Theatre (HDAT - http://www.5678hdat.org/history.html), started by a MAM, is relevant here because even though it is not in a BID and is not part of any BID plans, it sort of tackles those first two issues I mentioned. The HDAT "developed out of Ayisha Morgan-Lee’s passion to insure that children, ages 3 to 18 years old, who want to dance, but would not otherwise have an opportunity to dance would be able to dance with HDAT".
ReplyDeleteSo, here, the HDAT is engaging youth in the community, and is getting rid of the elitism with their art. Although this is more of a school and less of a professional organization, it would be interesting to put something like this (in any art form) along side a professional organization in a BID. So, the residents will actually be directly integrated into the new businesses/organizations in their own community.
I believe that designating art and cultural district as part of BID is truly effective to make a huge impact in the region at the initial stage of booming arts and culture up. Since it involves public and private sector partnership, arts and cultural district gets infrastructure done by government effort while benefiting from enhanced transportation, public safety, and streetscape. Thereby the district can build public awareness in order to meet critical mass keeping financial sustainability.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the paper, Creative Placemaking by Ann Markusen and Anne Gadwa, past efforts to nurture artistic experience to the community were designed as stand-alone edifices or complexes with little integration with street life or art-related businesses. However, over the past two decades, under the rubric of “the creative city,” arts, community, and civic leaders have joined in nurturing a larger portfolio of smaller spaces for arts and culture.
(http://www.nea.gov/pub/CreativePlacemaking-Paper.pdf)
Thinking of the “Multiplier effect,” which indicates the creation of a series of additional economic effect from a single activity, I believe that arts and cultural district with smaller spaces for arts and culture is more beneficial for multiple parties than a stand-alone, mega institution. The district increases floating population in the area, resulting in increase in retail sales and creation of restaurants. Also, by promoting smaller arts organizations in the area altogether, it helps smaller organizations to gain awareness from potential audiences who visited the district.
As Kate mentioned, the use of art as a tool for economic development can be harm to the arts. Yet I also believe we can think differently: the arts can be benefited from the economic development of the region. More population means more potential audience, and more audience means more concrete base to promote diverse art scene in the region. In other words, art can’t stand alone, but it cooperates with the municipalities, developers, and the community. In this sense, the “Creative Placemaking” concept describes well how the arts and culture can contribute to the economic development as well as how the creative places act as incubators of arts and cultural enterprise.
In addition, regarding the question 4 Kelsey posed, “Should the BID model only be restricted to downtown areas, or can it expand to more populated suburban sectors?” I want to share an answer from Kevin McMahon, Pittsburgh Cultural Trust when I asked a similar question if PCT has any plan to expand this cultural district size-wise or to other areas of the city. He said, “In order to expand the district in terms of area, it needs to reach critical mass. We would rather focus more on condensing arts and cultural environment within the existing district.” It was another difficulty I faced when thinking about accessibility issue, but I believe that this could be resolved in another way such as Quantum Theatre, which performs in the community all around the region.
However, BIDs have been successful in suburbs and even moderately rural areas. I think the struggle is BID to BID competition within an area / region.
DeleteI want to add another model to the discussion which emerged in several German cities during the last 10 years and is slightly different to the BID model: the creative cluster or creative park. Creative clusters/parks are normally located in upcoming neighborhoods, oftentimes with a history of industrial usage. The city buys this unused space and buildings (if it doesn’t own it already…) and rents it to newly rising for-profit companies and non-profit organizations which are all related to the cultural industry and the arts in one way or another. Normally the rent for the offices and studios is very, very low. Typical renters for creative clusters/parks can be dance clubs, (graphic) designers, music studio owners, photographers as well as theatres or music groups that need rehearsal space. Oftentimes the for-profit companies have to leave the cluster after a few years to make space for new organizations.
ReplyDeleteThere are several reasons why cities subsidize such kind of urbanization projects. One of them is already mentioned in several posts above: The city wants to change the image of unattractive neighborhoods through the arts and to make them more attractive for profitable businesses and wealthy residents. Furthermore, creative clusters/parks always generate new jobs and are a good marketing tool for the city. But in addition to that, there is another reason behind these projects:
The city wants to concentrate all the creative potential at one place because they expect positive exchanges between the organizations through the physical closeness. But in return to their rental support, the city expects especially the non-profit companies to find new ways of financing their organization through the new partnerships. As a result, the general monetary support through the city can be lowered. Therefore, creative clusters/parks are oftentimes just a shift of subsidiaries from the cultural budget of a city to the urban development budget.
There are a lot of really interesting points here. While Americans for the Arts does make the claim that the arts play a significant role in the economy, there are several caveats to that claim. As Marissa alluded to, that connection is very indirect – the impact of the arts on communities can most directly be felt through community development and creative place making. While there is legitimate skepticism above about the arts' involvement in development, I do believe that it is a necessity in the current age.
ReplyDeleteTo address Kate's concern about the arts being used as a utility tool, I believe that the two can go hand-in-hand – and with the current economic situation, they must. Arts organizations are where they are (going under, experiencing all sorts of yucky financial problems) largely because they have refused to change. I would not be slaving away at the Heinz College as a MAM if I did not believe in the inherent values of the arts, but I think that it is time for us as artists/art lovers/arts managers, to think about how artistic integrity can be maintained in work, while still achieving a social or societal purpose. In order for those who are not wealthy to have access to the arts, we must make them available in practical ways. This is not an age when people have tons of extra cash floating around – using the arts to engage communities is a way to make the arts accessible to those who do not have large budgets (monetary or time) to ingest the arts.
In response to Ariel's concern about redevelopment always displacing people, I agree that this is a tragic effect of what developers, et all have deemed to be improvement. There are, however, examples of places where development has occurred without outsiders infiltrating an area (and I believe that this model could be successfully used elsewhere). The Dudley Street Neighborhood in Boston is one such example (http://www.dsni.org). Also, Braddock, PA just down the road has and is doing a spectacular job with this, and is incorporating a lot of arts development (http://www.15104.cc). Brett also makes a good point about successful redevelopment happening surrounding mixed use housing. EVERYONE! TAKE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT! IT IS AMAZING AND MATT MEHALIK IS A SUPER HERO!
From what I can tell, a business improvement district encourages business diversity, which is a definite sign of a healthy economy. Now, I know that seems like it has nothing to do with the art, but it really does. If the economy is healthy (and there are lots of kinds of businesses), there is work for artists, as well as for people with all sorts of skill sets. In addition, business diversity encourages community participation in an area. With only an art gallery or a theater, no one is going to want to come to an area. With an art gallery, a theater, a few restaurants, a few bars, etc., people will be much more likely to be out and about, support businesses, and support the arts. There is a nice trickle-down effect from local business into arts organizations.
Finally, a BID, I think, really fosters a sense of cohesiveness. The Knight Soul of the Community study found that people value social offerings (including the arts) as the number one reason they are attached to a place, and the aesthetics of a place as the number three reason they are attached to a community. There is a place for the arts in development and redevelopment, we just have to figure out how to best include everyone and keep our motives pure. Of course, this is very idealistic, but hell, I like idealism! There are good examples of these things happening not so far away from us, and i don't think that we have to take an extreme one way or the other. Times are a-changing, and the arts might have to bend and shake a little to keep up. I love the thought of creative place making as a place for the arts to thrive.