EdCone.com

The good stuff's always in the comments: 

I want to know one thing from each Council member: Are you for a downtown PAC or not. Period. If you are for it, then work together to make it happen. Put aside egos and stop hedging your political futures on which way you think the wind is blowing with regards to the PAC. Show some leadership and show some collaboration that is reflective of the same expectations you have asked of a massive civic volunteer force. Stop airing petty grievances - valid or not - during the Council meetings. 

GSO has a huge opportunity to update our crumbling civic infrastructure and add a crucial element to downtown with one shot.

Let's not blow it, please. 

A smart lawyer with whom I worked on a difficult project would listen to people going on behind the scenes about the deal and the politics of the deal and then say, "Nevertheless, we are where we are." 

That was our cue to get back to work.

Because difficult projects are...difficult. Things don't always go according to plan. You have to adjust and keep moving forward. 

So to the GPAC team: You are where you are. It's not where you want to be, but you have a great product and now you need to adjust to the new realities to get the thing built.

That may mean winning a vote, and it definitely means winning a PR battle. So, you better get serious about doing that. And that means running a campaign that reaches young people and extends to zip codes you rarely visit (which means spending money).

If you're Robbie Perkins, it means finding ways to make the guy who wants your job and the woman who will eventually get it become solid proponents of this thing, and practicing persuasion instead of arm-twisting up and down the dais.  

Otherwise, you might as well quit now. 

I understand that the GPAC volunteers have been very busy coming up with a plan for the faciilty, and they've done a kick-ass job of it. 

Now they've got to sell it to the public. 

The lowest-hanging fruit is the moribund and frankly embarrassing Facebook page, which should be brought up to date and then maintained on a very regular basis.

Put up a link to this week's Council meeting. Then edit that footage into short bursts and link those, too (I know a highly-competent video editor who is available for volunteer work for the next several weeks). 

Get a road show together -- you can use much of the same material, and get Keith Holliday to host it -- and start hitting the campaign trail. 

Don't get caught in the downtown do-gooder bubble. It's a big city. 

Were I involved in the downtown PAC project, I would be advocating for a marketing and GOTV effort, and arguing that the marketing part should happen even if this thing doesn't come to a public vote. Maybe even use this internet thing all the kids are talking about. Make something as sophisticated and exciting as the PAC plan itself.

The team has come up with a project that looks like a winner for GSO. But that's not enough. Most people don't watch City Council meetings. This is not the answer. Time to get the word out.

City Council meeting: Performing arts center presentation looks great (video when it posts begins at 2:35).

They found the right place for the building, and the LeBauer Park makes it even better. 

Greensboro has a superannuated performing arts center. We're not repairing it. Time to replace it.

We should build this thing yesterday.

Former YWCA site seems like a good place to put a performing arts center.

But despite my strong confidence in Kathy Manning's credibility and capability, the organizers are going to have to do better than "trust us" on the private funding. 

City residents interested in sharing ideas and opinions about the design and location of the proposed Greensboro Performing Arts Center are invited to a series of upcoming public input sessions. The “charrette” process takes place October 16-18 in the lobby of the Elm Street Center, 203 S. Elm St.

More here.

A veritable cornucopia of local fare in this week's double-barrel Manager's memo, including solid waste, the noise ordinance, food trucks, the downtown performing arts center, and more.

Plus OMG nobody is going to sign up for the food truck trial your downtown food truck dance card for October.

Is Keith Holliday's ambitious plan for a theater district the right way to go for a downtown PAC?

I don't know. That's why it's good that we're taking this process slowly.

There are things to recommend Holliday's vision, including the use of City-owned land, the protection and preservation of the Carolina, and the understanding that downtown is more than the y-axis of Elm Street. 

A key question, beyond design issues: Will the private money flow to that site? Donors seem to be pretty finicky about location.

That much-discussed study on the overbuilding (in every sense) of arts facilities presents a real opportunity for the Greensboro DPAC group.

Our local project is not just a me-too effort, it's a much-needed update of our existing performing arts center. So right away the organizers can begin to draw some distinctions between Greensboro's plans and some that have worked out less than well in other places.

But the GSO promoters also need to show some rigor in terms of cost estimates, and provide a sense that the challenges of building a big fancy arts facility are well understood from the start. The report includes examples and data for comparision. Using that information to build and bulletproof a plan seems essential. 

Good news on the downtown PAC: "To continue its work, the task force will evolve into a new entity or commission...It will include some task force members and city and elected leaders."

If they can come up with a solid plan, get private-sector money north of $20 million, and find a revenue stream from users (or hotel taxees), this thing could really happen.

UPDATE: Council extends the PAC process to nail down details (e.g., location) in advance of a possible special bond vote next spring...promises money to keep the effort going.

Seems like a win for the PAC team to me. A rushed vote looked like a loser from the start, now they have momentum and time.

No way this was the plan all along...right?

/update

Here's the PAC presentation for tonight's Council meeting.

Some buzz I'm hearing from people in the GSO arts community:

• What are the business and operating plans for a DPAC? Real numbers, not happy talk, that show sustainability over time. What anchor tenants might keep it lit, night after night?
• And, will local arts groups be able to afford to use this thing? An expensive facility might be costly to book -- what provisions, if any, will be made on that front?

I get the sense that a lot of folks are still on the sidelines, willing to support a winner but in no hurry to commit when so many questions remain.

The City PAC presentation was about proof of concept -- hey, we really could put a nice facility downtown -- and on that level it was quite convincing.

But although the first section was headlined "A Work in Progress" and the word "conceptual" was used early and often to describe both the design and the site, people were quick to weigh in on the architecture of the building, pictured and possible.

Which is great, because you have to get the design right from the start.

This image shows one of the challenges of the Bellemeade site: On one side you've got a modern glass-clad office tower, and on the other (per Professor Wharton) a Richardsonian Romanesque revival church. Similar issues would arise on Washington Street, with the boxy N&R building on one side and our lovely old train station on the other.

Another concern is that the big parking lot makes it look like we might be building a suburban building in an urban setting. This article about the new Barnes Foundation in Philly deals with that same problem -- amazing new building, cut off from its environment.

Wharton continues:

That kind of architectural setting deserves some very careful thought. Just putting something up that's just "sleek and modern" won't make the kind of statement that Greensboro needs to make here. People are watching. Are we going to be hasty and dull? Sophisticated and daring? Stodgy and traditional? We need to at least have a public conversation about it. This building will help define our city for a couple of generations.

Cities often have architectural competitions for this kind of thing. Why not us?

Here's the City's DPAC presentation for the Bellemeade site (big old PDF).

City Council discussion begins here around 4:07:40.

N&R coverage here; $13 million in private money to date seems promising.

...adding, whatever the political prospects for a smaller bond, they're better than the political prospects for a larger bond.

I would guess that Greensboro will not be moving ahead with a downtown performing arts center this year.

A lot of work has been done, and a lot of progress has been made, but barring some deus ex machina on the funding side this thing is not happening in 2012.

With the ticket tax proposal in suspended animation, the amount of bond money needed to build a swell new PAC seems likely to be more than voters will bear in a still-shaky economy. 

But a delay should not be a death knell for the project. 

Whatever political calculations lay behind the timing of this campaign, a lot of people who liked the general idea wondered why we had to rush. Now there's time to finish the job of planning and marketing the facility. It's a necessary replacement for the superannuated theater that has been a major part of Greensboro's cultural life for decades, and it would be a great addition to downtown.

Let's keep at it.

There's talk beneath this post on the DPAC ticket tax* about Greensboro's self-image and ambitions, relative to other NC cities and as we choose to define ourself.

Missing the boom that remade Charlotte and Raleigh left us some nice possibilities in terms of being clean, green, and livable, which should be good for business and good for the people who live here. We have not focused on those goals as much as I'd like, but we haven't completely paved the county yet, either, so there's still hope.

The continued vitality of downtown is an important element of that strategy, and I think letting patrons of a new facility help pay for it is a good plan.

And it's worth remembering that a significant performing arts space is not just a status marker in the race to keep up with Wake and Mecklenburg, it's the kind of cultural amenity for which Greensboro has been known for decades. In fact, we're talking about replacing a superannuated facility and putting it in a better location, not dreaming of something completely new.

GSO's manageable scale and mellow vibe are big attractions for some of us, but those things are not all that define what this city is and what we can be.

* UPDATE: Tixtax a non-starter at General Assembly, courtesy of John Blust.

Nancy Vaughan says proposed tix tax legislation just voted on by GSO City Council is "targeted at PAC and specific language avoids other City facilities."

Which should go some way toward placating opponents of the proposed downtown performing arts center, but probably won't.

Bondless financing for the PAC has been the buzz behind the scenes for a while now. 

What surprises me is the confidence that big private funding is on the way. I heard some big numbers the other night, and from sources I thought might be off the table. I hope that's true. 

UPDATE: More here from the BizBlog. No way Bryan kicks in big money for a downtown PAC, unless it does.

/update

Too bad everything the Bryan Foundation does is evil, because otherwise the idea of selling the nice stadium it built for Greensboro and presumably reinvesting that money in other good local projects would be laudable.

Private local ownership of the ballpark by the parties most interested in its continued success, recycling of philanthropic dollars...but, y'know, Jim Melvin, so let's all hate this.

Jeff makes some good points here about the political dangers of pushing the downtown performing arts center and the irony of sprawlmeisters hawking new urbanism. 

But while adding amenities to keep up with other cities is foolish as an end in itself, it makes sense to consider projects on a case-by-case basis and decide on their value to the citizens of Greensboro. 

As for the heart and soul thing, obviously that's subjective and personal, and I can make a case for all kinds of places in this city that seem to me part of its essence. But downtown is special, and not because of any given bar or restaurant -- more for its public space and common ground. 

I tried to get at that a bit in posts like this one and this one. The value of our downtown is real, and spots like Center City Park and the courthouse square are big parts of that value, along with the sidewalks themselves. A performing arts center could be a great addition to that common space. 

A cautionary tale for designers of our potential downtown PAC:

[T]he 4.5-acre site is too small for the sprawl of suburban-style, automobile amenities demanded by the Barnes' board. The parking lot and driveways visually strangle the architecture and, worst of all, cut off the building physically from the city it is meant to serve.

I went to the original Barnes Foundation in Merion when I took a painting class in college. Painting, it turns out, is one of the many things at which I am terrible. 

UPDATE: A softer version makes the print edition: "The city attorney disagrees with the tourism bureau’s interpretation of the state law that governs the use of the tax. Interim City Manager Denise Turner Roth and Fourrier will meet today to discuss the issue."

/update

So if we can't use hotel taxes to fund a downtown performing arts center...then what?

Is this one attorney's opinion, or kind of the last word?

Community forums on the proposed Greensboro Downtown Performing Arts Center are scheduled for Thursday 3/29 from 11:30 AM-1 PM and 6-7:30 PM at Elm Street Center's Regency Room; Saturday 4/21 from 12 –1:30 PM and 3:30 – 5:00 PM at Holy Trinity's Haywood Duke room; and Thursday 5/24 from 7:30 – 9 AM, 12:00 -1:30 PM and 6 -7:30 PM back at Elm Street Center.

Press release:

The March 29 forums are for the purpose of listening to you, the residents or Greensboro. In the April forum, we will share what is learned as we study performing arts centers in other communities and in the May forum, we will discuss what has been learned throughout the study, including the economic feasibility of such a center.

The GPAC website is up and running.

N&R lays out five possible locations for a downtown performing arts center.

• The parking area at the northeast corner of North Elm and Bellemeade Street.
• The former YWCA property on YWCA Place.
• The News & Record parking lot on Washington Street.
• The city parking lot across from the Melvin Municipal Office Building on Washington.
• A location at the South Elm Street redevelopment site.

Left, a map showing highways close to downtown that might bring visitors from the Triangle, Winston-Salem, Charlotte, and points north. Another (perhaps minor) advantage for the South Elm and Lee site?

Meanwhile, the GPAC Facebook page tells me that the task force will hire AMS Planning & Research for an "economic impact/feasibility report that assesses the viability of a performing arts center in downtown Greensboro."

The Facebook presence is a decent start for a group that has pledged transparency, but given the short turnaround time for the project I don't think it's nit-picking to say the website should be live already and that duplicating the FB stream on a blog available to anyone would be a good idea, too.

A bunch of images and commentary on a potential downtown performing arts center for GSO  here (scroll down).

Thnx to DC for the pointer.

GSO's best blogger dusts off the keyboard to inform the debate over a new performing arts center.

Distributed parking was key to the renaissance of downtown Greenville, SC, as the Action Greensboro folks learned years ago...

...Downtown Chattanooga provides a great example of the principle at work...

But: "At this point there seems to be no one on the committee studying the proposed PAC who will evaluate this essential piece of the puzzle."

T-Dub: "Currently, my personal opinion is that I prefer a coliseum location. Dr. Turner’s comments on infrastructure around the facility swayed me in that direction. Currently, also my opinion, is that it’s not the right time to put the bond on the ballot."

Looking forward to more info on the presentation shared with the Coliseum commission today.

We need more board and commission members blogging about our boards and commissions.

The Greensboro City Council has asked The Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro to convene a task force that will study the benefits of constructing a new state-of-the-art performing arts center.

News release here.

UPDATE: The link is now broken and I can't find the release anywhere on the CFGG site; fortunately I have a copy, which you can read after the jump.

Robbie Perkins:

Lot's of folks are working hard to put together a plan to evaluate the cost and potential of a downtown PAC. Council gave staff clear direction, so let's see what the facts are before we come up with ways it can't happen. The support for the effort is strong and I believe we have a real chance of success this time. Stay tuned.

Fair enough, and, as Tony Wilkins says in a subsequent comment, good to see our mayor joining in here at open-mic night.

I also liked what Ron said in the same thread: "If this thing gets built, I hope the architecture will be very interesting instead of the usual dull buildings going up all over the city. I want to see something that can become an architectural landmark in the city."

Back to the point about coming up with ways this can't happen -- I want it to happen. The two big hitters I mentioned in the post want it to happen. But we're all a little freaked out by the hurry-up, and nervous that a campaign conceived in haste could derail and have negative ramifications for a long, long time.

"I'm sitting this one out," said one weighty downtown booster when I asked about the rush-rush campaign to get a performing arts center on the ballot for November.

I heard the same about another big hitter this afternoon.

They are not alone.

Look, I'm a fan of Matt Brown, and I think the Coliseum is great for this city in more ways than one.

And I think a downtown PAC could be a huge win for Greensboro.

But this mad dash on the PAC is a reckless strategy -- and I don't think voters will just turn around and dump money on the Coliseum if the as-yet-non-existent downtown plan fails.

So that would be a lose-lose.

Why not slow down, allocate some hotel tax money to other projects, let the plan gestate and the economy heal and public support grow, and then build a great new facility?

I'd love to be wrong here -- to see a great plan and private funding and community support all come into focus by springtime. So far, though, it's sound and fury and what seems like a doomed backdoor strategy to build at the Coliseum.

Allen Johnson on the PAC: 

The rush to get a bond item on the ballot this year for a such a center downtown or at the Greensboro Coliseum — or somewhere — seems hastily conceived and ambiguous. It reminds me of my days as a kid playing sandlot football and drawing plays in the dirt (“Everybody go long!)”   

...Has anyone done any kind of business plan? How would the facility mesh with existing arts venues such as the Carolina Theater? What kinds of performers would it attract?

...It also would be helpful if there were some sort of master plan for sports and cultural arts venues that helped to determine what should go downtown, to the coliseum and elsewhere.

Tea leaves spilled after AJ filed his column indicate some measure of support from the Carolina Theatre crowd, but that situation needs to be defined more clearly, and all those other questions need answers long before this project earns a spot on the November ballot.

A roundup of reactions to the downtown performing arts center plan, including the minor detail that there is no plan.

Ed Wolverton mentions that land would not have to be purchased if city-owned land is used. Not sure if I've mentioned this or not, but the city owns seven empty acres at South Elm and Lee, which would be a prime location for this kind of facility.

Also interesting: Carolina Theatre CEO Keith Holliday is quoted, which makes it seem that he's not opposed to a new PAC. That jibes with what I've heard from Carolina supporters.

My question: Why rush this thing onto the November ballot? Why not take the time to develop a great plan, line up some private funding, and launch the campaign when the economy is further into recovery?

As the City begins considering a new performing arts facility, it should ponder the good advice involving transparency and due diligence in a recent letter from Robert Malekoff to the N&R.

My guess is that a downtown location will be more appealing to voters than the Coliseum complex. Having Matt Brown run the thing would be great, but a the first law of real estate says choosing the right spot is critical. The City-owned lots at South Elm and Lee strike me as strong contenders, but there may be several good sites in the ambit of walkability.

Timing is important. Rushing this thing into a still-stagnant economy would be fatal, and rightly so. Proponents should take their time in developing -- in public -- a meticulous planning and marketing campaign that explains where the money will come from and where it will go, and why we want to do this in the first place.

If Greensboro wants to build a downtown arts center, where would it go?

I've seen suggestions that the Carolina Theatre be expanded. I have no idea whether this is feasible, or desirable. And would a new, freestanding facility complement the Carolina, or compete with it?

There's a large (6+ acres) site available at Murrow and Lindsay (the old Galloway Buick dealership). It's close enough to the Cultural Arts Center, Historical Museum, and Children's Museum to be a part of a real arts district. One downside: the asking price would add almost $4 million to the project budget.

And then there are the big lots (seven acres in all) at the corner of South Elm and Lee. The City already owns the land, and although a development group has been named, no final deal has been struck. A new facility at the southern trip of downtown would be great fit for the neighborhood, and also easily accessible from other parts of the city and 40/85.

Ideas for other downtown sites?

"Your Urgent Action is needed!! Help locate a Performing Arts Center in Downtown Greensboro. Contact your City Council TODAY"

Some folks are trying to get performing arts center built downtown; full text after the jump.