a handbook for vancouver artists seeking affordable studio

A Handbook for Vancouver Artists Seeking Affordable Studio Space

By Mona Poon

A Handbook for Vancouver Artists Seeking Affordable Studio Space

By Mona Poon

B.A.Sc., McMaster University, 2007

A MASTER PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS (PLANNING)

in

THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Community and Regional Planning

We accept this project as conforming to the required standard

…………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (VANCOUVER)

April 2010

© Mona Poon, 2010

A Handbook for Vancouver Artists Seeking Affordable Studio Space 1

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements 3

Executive Summary 4

List of Tables and Figures 6

Introduction 7

Problem Statement 9

Research Questions and Objectives 10

Project Scope 11

Terminology 13

Methodology and Approach 14

Project Format: Handbook 15

Literature Review and Background Information 15

The Vancouver Case 20

Economic Profile of the Vancouver Artist 20

History of Live/Work Studios in Vancouver 22

City of Vancouver Land Use and Development Policies and Guidelines 23

City of Vancouver Initiatives in Affordable Artist Studio Space 25

Cultural Plans for Vancouver 26

Recent Vancouver Projects 28

Case Studies 32

UK – Village Underground (London) 32

UK – Acme Studios (London) 34

Canada – First Nations Co-operative (Victoria) 35

Canada – Artscape Triangle Lofts (Toronto) 37

US – Open Container V (Santa Barbara) 40

US – The Tilsner Co-operative & Artspace Projects, Inc. (Saint Paul) 41

US – BID Downtown Artist Spaces Program (New Rochelle) 43

US – Boston Artist Space Initiative (Boston) 45


Lessons Learned 48

Recommendations 50

For Artists/Co-operatives/Non-profits 50

For the City of Vancouver 51

Future studies and considerations 51

Policy and Zoning opportunities 53

For Other Interested Third Parties 54

On Partnerships 56

Conclusion 58

Bibliography 60

Appendix A 70


Acknowledgements This project would not have been possible without the assistance and support of

many kind-hearted individuals. Thank you to my friends and family who have been

very understanding during this time and always available for consultation. I am very

appreciative towards Dr. Tom Hutton, my advisor, who has been open and

encouraging from the beginning to end of this project. Special thanks must be given

to Jacqueline Gijssen and her Cultural Planning team for the essential advice they

provided. Last, but not least, thank you to all those who shared their personal stories

on affordable studio space with me. Without their collaboration, this project would

not have been possible.


Executive Summary Post-industrial cities experience physical changes as they transition from

manufacturing-based economies towards knowledge- and culture-based economies.

Vancouver is no exception. In Vancouver’s post-industrial period, combinations of

both market and planning forces have converted land use from industrial and

commercial to residential use, causing an increase of housing close to the Central

Business District (CBD), or downtown area. The new buildings included increased

amenities and design features that also increase the price of housing. As more and

more new housing develops, artists are sometimes directly displaced from their

studios when the buildings they occupy are sold to developers for strictly housing use

and artists are evicted. More often, artists are indirectly displaced when they are

unable to afford the new rent in a renovated building, or the local everyday amenities

become too expensive. In these cases, artists are forced to move further away from

the CBD, or face drastic increases in rent to remain in the same area. This problem

will only be exasperated with time as housing prices have surpassed pre-recession

levels and continue to climb.

The average income of the Vancouver artist is $27,100 CAD, compared to

$35,000 CAD for all BC workers, and $47,299 as the median household income in

Vancouver. Artists are at a disadvantage financially as they cannot afford to

compete for living and working space with other Vancouverites in terms of price. The

City of Vancouver, individual artists and other organizations have strived to make

affordable studio space possible for artists. The City runs several initiatives such as

an Artist Studio Award program and owns artist studios that are leased to the CORE

artists’ co-operative. Other individual artists have banded together and secured

space by forming their own studio co-operative with the help of outside organizations.

Some centres have also focused on sharing common space on a rental or

membership basis. To better understand the context of this issue in Vancouver, the

City recently commissioned a study that produced the Cultural Facilities Priorities

Plan 2008-2023 with the help of the local arts and culture community. This study has

identified that increased capacity building in terms of networking as well as facility

skills is needed to further advance the progress on this issue. To assist in tackling


this issue, this project examines eight studies from other cities that have used

innovative methods to ensure that affordable studio space is available for artists.

Through an examination of the Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan as well as

careful analysis of books, journals, newspaper articles, websites, policy documents

and interviews, this study has found some measures that have been recently taken to

address the lack of affordable artist studio space in Vancouver. However, some

problems still persist including a lack of communication and co-ordination of existing

information for artists on this issue. Also lacking is effective partnership between

different groups interested in affordable studio space for artists. Funding is another

problem as the British Columbia provincial government does not have any formal

programs for arts and culture infrastructure support, even though the highest relative

concentration of artists in Canada are located in Vancouver. Hill Strategies’ analysis

of the 2006 Census found that artists comprise 2.35% of the population in

Vancouver, compared to the second-highest concentration of 1.87% in Victoria and

concentrations of 1.60% in Toronto and 1.53% in Montreal (Hill, 2009). An emphasis

should also be placed on creative approaches to securing long-term spaces for

artists as short-term projects may only have a limited effect and could lead to

increased gentrification in artist neighbourhoods. A review and update of current

policy and zoning bylaws would enforce compliance at development permit and

construction stages so that appropriate studio spaces for artists are created. A post-

occupancy review of artist studios is also required to ensure that they are actually

used by artists for the production of art.


List of Tables and Figures Table 1: Median Household Income, Average Gross Rent 21

and STIR (rental) by Area, 2006

Figure 1: Vancouver Neighbourhoods 8

Figure 2: Artists as a Percentage of Labour Force in Vancouver FSAs 8

Figure 3: Eastside Culture Crawl Map, 2009 12

Figure 4: Concord-Pacific developments 17

Figure 5: Village Underground 33

Figure 6: Open Container V, from outside 40

Figure 7: Open Container V, from inside 40


Introduction

This research initially developed from a conversation with Valerie Arntzen, a local

artist and the former Executive Director of the Eastside Culture Crawl Society

(ECCS)1, in which this study researcher was informed about the lack of affordable

studio spaces in Vancouver where artists could practice their trade. This project

investigates this issue, first beginning with the City of Vancouver’s recently created

Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan, then extending to literature sources, case studies of

how other cities have dealt with this issue and conversations with individuals that

have been involved with the struggle for studio space.

In post-industrial Vancouver’s current state of re-structuring and re-

development, it is becoming more and more difficult for artists to secure affordable

studio space, especially in the central areas. An increasing number of new housing

developments are being built on the highly valued land that artists occupy. Artists

tend to seek out space that is usually cheaper in price, within close proximity of the

core downtown area(s), within walking distance of public transit, close to industrial

land and usually in older buildings. In Vancouver, artists tend to congregate in the

Strathcona, Downtown Eastside, Grandview/Woodlands and Mount Pleasant areas

as these areas satisfy all of the above requirements and also boast close proximity to

the Burrard Inlet waterfront. This area of high artist concentration (see area shaded

red in Figure 2) was identified by Hill Strategies’ 2005 analysis of the 2001 Census

(Artscape, 2008).

Of course these highly prized areas are also of interest to developers. One

example of such a case began in November of 2007 where 30 studio artists were told

that the owner Amacon wanted to convert their building at 901 Main Street into high-

end apartments. In an attempt to mediate the situation, the City of Vancouver

negotiated an agreement with Amacon to allow the artists first rights of refusal for

studio space at a second development site.

1 The ECCS originated as an annual 3-day visual arts festival organized by artists in Vancouver’s eastside. It has developed into an organization that provides artist support the whole year round.


Figure 1: Vancouver Neighbourhoods Source: City of Vancouver, 2005

Figure 2: Artists as a Percentage of Labour Force in Vancouver FSAs2 Source: Artscape, 2008

2 FSA denotes Forward Sorting Area, the first three digits in the postal code.


Amacon and the artists tried to discuss the agreement but ended up in a stalemate

upon the final price. Occupation in the new building would be accompanied by an

increased cost of 70% of the artists’ previous rent due to higher common-area fees.

Since these amenities are not of use to the artists, they were forced to find new

studio space elsewhere when their lease ended in May 2009 (Werb, 2009; Meggs,

2009).

The increased number of redevelopments has a symbiotic relationship with

increased real estate values that have changed the price points of the formerly

affordable Vancouver artist areas of Strathcona, the Downtown Eastside, Mount

Pleasant and Grandview/Woodlands. Arntzen mentioned that she had purchased a

Strathcona heritage home with four others as studio space in the mid-90s for

$390,000. As of November 2007, the home was valued at $1.5 million (Woolley,

2007).

Redevelopment and increased real estate values are just two of the reasons

why it has become difficult for artists to find affordable studio space. Other reasons

could be linked to restrictive land-use designations, municipal policies or high permit

fees to secure and maintain a space. As the search for affordable studio space

becomes more and more common, some artists have banded together and turned to

the idea of forming co-operatives to collectively own and manage their space. Others

may turn to not-for-profit organizations to help facilitate the process. Even if

successful, securing affordable studio space is still an expensive and time-

consuming endeavour for artists, co-operatives and organizations as individual artists

without high incomes often drive these initiatives.

Problem Statement

This project seeks to research and evaluate artist efforts, artist co-operatives, non-

profit foundations as well as other municipal or regional initiatives that have been

successful in providing or securing affordable studio space for artists. These

examples will be from both the Canadian and international context. Although the

focus of the project will be on studio space, this research will touch upon live/work


and work/live spaces, as they are often inseparable from studio space alone. Studio

spaces located in multi-use spaces will also be discussed as another possible

method of securing artists’ production space.

In combination with an assessment of Vancouver’s current policies related to

artist studio space, this research aims to arrive at conclusions of what creative

techniques and policies would be best suited to ameliorate the lack of affordable

artist studio space in Vancouver. Some scholars have conducted research in this

area, such as Sacco et al. (2007) and Macdonald and Chai (2007). Additionally, the

City of Vancouver and other members of the arts community have also worked in this

area. However, a large portion of this research has just begun and is currently in

progress.

Research Questions and Objectives The questions that this research will respond to are as follows:

1. What are the largest barriers to making artist studios affordable in Vancouver?

What are the largest restrictions on the availability or supply of affordable

studio space? It is due to the cost of infrastructure construction or set-up

expenses? What role do Vancouver’s policies, bylaws and administrative

procedures play into this matter?

2. From case studies, what are the most innovative and successful

(demonstrated to work in the eyes of both artists and municipalities)

techniques that artists in Vancouver could employ to address the lack of studio

space?

3. What are current City of Vancouver policies concerning affordable artist studio

spaces? What is the City of Vancouver doing to address this issue?

Based on these questions, the objectives of this research are to:

• Identify the main barriers to affordable studio space in Vancouver


• Find and describe successful, innovative and concrete examples that artist co-

operatives, artists and non-profit organizations can use to forward their goal of

achieving affordable artist studio space

• Provide effective examples of policies and initiatives concerning affordable

artist studio space that Vancouver policymakers can adopt

• Showcase local examples from artists, co-operatives, non-profit organizations

and the City of Vancouver of affordable space provision

• Compile a user-friendly list of reference points Vancouver artists can use

when searching for information about affordable studio space

The objective of this project is to generate findings of this research to help artists

seeking affordable studio space. As information on this subject is not very

centralized, this project will compile resources by outlining the history of this issue

and the current state of affordable studio spaces in Vancouver. Supplementary case

studies will provide innovative examples that will encourage artists to seek out

feasible solutions to this issue.

Project Scope The scope of this project will include international case studies, but the area of

primary focus of recommendations comprises the Strathcona, Downtown Eastside,

Mount Pleasant and Grandview/Woodlands districts as they are the areas that are

the most desired in Vancouver by artists, and also the areas where the highest

concentration of artists work. The Eastside Culture Crawl Society’s (ECCS) studios

map in Figure 3 provides an overview of the existing studios in the area. Although

this is not an exhaustive list of all the studios in the area, it is a good indicator of the

concentration of studios located in the areas of focus for this project.


Figure 3: Eastside Culture Crawl Map, 2009 Source: Eastside Culture Crawl Society, 2009

The focus of this project is artist studios, which can be defined as places for

the production of art by artists, as they are defined by the National Occupation

Classification for Statistics (NOC-S), included as Appendix A. The NOC-S is used in

this project as it is the classification system used in the 2006 Census, upon which

much of the data and statistics in this report are based. The studios in discussion fall

into a number of categories. They may be part of a work-only space, spaces that

also combine living as in live/work or work/live studios (termed differently depending

on which is the primary use), as well as studios that are a part of multi-use spaces.

Multi-use spaces include other functions such as galleries or training space.

This report acknowledges that most of the studio spaces discussed in its

contents are formal studio spaces that were created with the original intent to be

used by artists for the creation of art. It is still important to note, however, that many

informal studio spaces exist in the city. A common example of informal studio space

!"#$!%&#'

&(%"#)*

+!,-./%

0/'#

1/2#""

34""'/..

#56,/'&/)!

#561#%&#'

#561#%&#'

(%4/%

-##7#'

#568!.94%0.

#568!.94%0.

7'!%,#.

)#%!:"#.

-49,8#%#'

74'.96!)#%(#

0'!%9

24""4!3

,8!'"#.

,/99/%

2//&"!%&

,/33#',4!"6&'4)#

0'!)#"#*

!&!%!,

7'!%-"4%

2//&"!%&

,/33#',4!"6&'5

.!".:('*

3,"#!%

/&"(3

,"!'-6&'4)#

)#'%/%

)#'%/%

%!14#'

1!'-#'

(%4/%

'!*3('

0"#%6&'4)#

1!%&/'!

9'4(3181/2

#"".9#2!'9

0#/'04!

8!2-.6

8!2-.

,!31:#""

8#!9"#*

1'4/'

9#'34%!"

1'4%,#..

8#!9"#*

;(#:#,

3!4%

'!4"2

!*

'!*3('

3!"-4%

.9!94/%

<

=

>

?

@

A

<

!"#$"%&'(%%)*+,#&'-*,.-=

!)//+"*&0"11

2&345&'!657&&&86!9:':8639

> ;,.",<$(*"&'(%%)*+,#&'-*,.-

A

?

=>."*+"*&')1,)."1&'-*,.-

'<"?-1&6.,/&@ABC&D)*1-E#F

9BC6!5'5,5<DE<61FGCHH

+FBI67CJJKC<?E?61FGCHH

#HCLCIMNH6&COKPIOD<D68NGQO6

D?D6(IKFI6.M56

R>@6,HNJQ6&JKSC

;TNMMJF61FOCD>>6-CCUCJ6.M5

4JFIOKVC63CMNHGFJQO@><6#561CIVCJ6.M5

@A<6#560CFJPKN6.M5

4%7/://98

D<@6#568NOMKIPO6.M5

(IKFI60FOWCH6>@<68CNMHCX6!SC

0NHHCJX60NYBCM6?=?61FGCHH6.M5

#23!6Z69BC6'KYC6:HFYQ[E=6#NOM68NOMKIPO

?A>68NGQO6!SC

:KP60JCCI68FTOCA?E68CNMHCX6!SC5

2KCIO6.MTVKF>EA6&TIHCSX

/YMFWTO6.MTVKFO>R>61FGCHH6.M5

>>R6'NKHGNX>=R6'NKHGNX

'NKHMFGI6.MTVKFO>=<6'NKHGNX

=[D6!HC\NIVCJ6.M5

9BC64JFIGFJQO=>?6!HC\NIVCJ6.M5

8TIPJX9BTL]O=>>63NKI

<E5[6.MTVKF@@>63NKI6.M

RE<3NKI6.M5

?R>6#NOM60CFJPKN6.M5

:NOKY64I^TKJX<E<<63NKI6.M5

R>E6.MNMKFI6.M5

9BC67NYMFJXD>[68CNMHCX6!SC5

:NJJCMM_O6.MTVKFD>[6#560CFJPKN6.M5

+NYQOFI67KSCDAE6+NYQOFI6!SC5

9BC62FJQOBFWAA@6(IKFI6.MJCCM

0CFJPKN6+NYQOFI?E?6#560CFJPKN6.M5

@>E61JKIYCOO6!SC5

/HV6,BTJYB@>@6-CCUCJ6.M5

'NHWB63FOYFSKMYB.YTHWMTJC

[<R6<`=61JKFJ6.M5

+FNI69NXHCJD>E6(IKFI

0NKHNI6%PNI[R[6#560CFJPKN6.M5

.MTVKF63KJN?[A68NGQO6.M5

-KJOMX63NMMBCGO[=<6-CCUCJ6.M5

1NICUKYKF6.MTVKFO[EE6-CCUCJ6.M5

"KIVN6'CNV6+CGCHJX@[>60HCI6&J5

'TOOCHH68NYQICX6,CJNLKYO?>E6)CJIFI6&JKSC

:HTC6"NIMCJI6.MTVKF<=<[6#561CIVCJ6.M5

!IVX6:HKYQ6,CJNLKYO<=E[61CIVCJ6.M5

[<=6#561CIVCJ6.M5a!HHCXb

7JNIQHKI6.MTVKFO<<EA67JNIQHKI6.M5

1KIQ63FIQCX.MTVKFO

[>E6(IKFI6.M5

"KQCICOO6FU68FLC@?<6#560CFJPKN6.M5

1NJQCJ6.MJCCM6.MTVKFO<EEE61NJQCJ6.M5

/HV67FTIVJX6:TKHVKIP<DRE6)CJIFI6&J5

&NJQ63NMMCJ63CVKN<>>A6,HNJQ6&JKSC

2NMCJOBCV6.MTVKF<<=?63Y"CNI6&JKSC

*CHHFG68FTOC6.MTVKF

<>AE62FFVHNIV

9BC6-CMMHC7JKCIVOBKW6.FYKCMX<D=?6)CIN]HCO6.M5

2KHHKNL6,HNJQ6.MTVKFO

<><E62KHHKNL6.M5

9BC6/IKFI6.MTVKF<<E>6(IKFI6.M5

3CJPNMJFKVRD?6)CJIFI6&J5

)NHCJKC60F]CJM+CGCHJX

<A=[6%NWKCJ6.M5

'NXYNL6,FLLTIKMX6,CIMJCR=E6#568NOMKIPO6.M5

www.easts ideculturecrawl .com | 2009

!"+1,(G*

H+"I)$,

;,.",<$(*"

'1".>

H-*"J1-/

9<-&D.+E-


is a space zoned only for living that has been adopted into work/live or live/work

space, which are difficult to track. Due to the elusive nature of these spaces,

information about them is limited and informal studio spaces are not the main focus

of this report, although they still remain an important component of artist facilities in

Vancouver.

Terminology Specific terms discussed in this report have been defined as follows:

Leasing a space refers to contract set for a specific period of time, such as six

months or a year, for which the tenant agrees to rent a property from a landlord.

Once agreed upon, changes (such as increases in monthly payments) cannot be

made to the lease until it expires. The landlord pays for the property tax and usually

provides maintenance. Utilities are subject to the lease agreement.

Rental agreements are usually month-to-month and there is no set period of

residence. Both the landlord and tenant are able to make changes after the month

ends. The landlord pays for the property tax and usually provides maintenance, while

utilities are subject to the rental agreement. This option is likely the most expensive

choice for a tenant and provides the least tenure security, but this choice allows the

most flexibility for both the tenant and landlord.

Ownership means that a space is purchased by an owner or organization, either in

full or through the assistance of a mortgage. Ownership usually includes a larger up-

front payment, as well as larger initial monthly payments but may be more affordable

over the long-term when the mortgage is paid off. The owner must pay all property

tax, maintenance and utilities. This option may require more co-ordination and

financial support, but it also provides the most tenure security.

For-profit co-op refers to a group of individuals seeking out a common goal, with the

intention of making a profit. The profit can be shared within the co-op, or among its


members. Some co-ops may allow members and non-members to invest in the co-

op through shares, which accrue benefits/profits that are paid to the shareholders.

Non-profit co-op refers to a group of individuals seeking out a common goal, with all

proceeds raised from co-op efforts to be recycled back into the co-op to enhance its

services. Non-profit co-ops do not use a share system.

Methodology and Approach

This research aims to produce a handbook about affordable studio space that

Vancouver artists, organizations and government groups alike will find useful. Since

information on this topic has not yet been compiled and documented for the

Vancouver context, creating a handbook was the research approach that would

create the most appropriate product. As an introduction into this topic, this approach

will briefly document what types of possibilities are available in this field, upon which

future research can build.

This report employed a variety of methods, utilizing both primary and

secondary sources. The research began with a review of the 2008-2023 Cultural

Facilities Priorities Plan, a study commissioned by the City of Vancouver and

conducted by consultants Artscape with wide participation and support from the

Vancouver arts and cultural communities. Additional research sources included

relevant literature (books and journals), newspaper articles, artist and governmental

websites, policy documents and personal interviews. This document will be

organized into five main sections: a literature review of cultural planning and the post-

industrial city that includes background information about Vancouver; eight case

studies of different strategies that have been used to secure studio space for artists

in other municipalities, including some international reference cases; context-specific

research about the state of this issue in Vancouver; recommendations and finally, a

conclusion.


Project Format: Handbook

This handbook format differs from a traditional research paper in that it will include

reference points for each topic of this project summarized at the end of the sub-

section. The reference points will provide key details for the information discussed in

the sub-section as well as list other relevant sources that the interested reader could

consult. These reference points aim for a greater degree of integrated

comprehension and easier navigation by placing information at the end of each sub-

section rather than only as a list of sources at the end of the document. The

handbook will also use language that is accessible to a wide audience, avoiding the

use of technical jargon whenever possible.

The handbook approach targets artists who may not be familiar with official

government documents, or who may not have the time to conduct extensive research

into policies or successful case studies. The reader can easily flip to the section of

interest and conduct his or her own further research if desired. By deconstructing

and organizing the available information on this topic while providing reference points

to guide artists with additional questions, this research aims to enable artists to make

their own choices regarding studio space. They will be able to thoroughly understand

the context of the issue, and what options are available to tackle the problem as an

individual, or as part of a larger group or organization.

Literature Review and Background Information

In order to place the issue of affordable studio space in context, it is necessary to first

trace the origins of this issue. Zukin mentions that as far back as the 1920s, light

industry and working-class populations began to be expelled from North American

and Western European cities, making room for more profitable uses in the inner city

(Zukin, 1982). By the 1960s, suburban houses offered affordability and more space

for families with children. At this time, a period of restructuring began with a move

away from the traditional manufacturing economy and towards a service-based


economy (Landry, 2005; Hutton, 2004; Zukin 1982). In the 1970s, privately

subsidized capital reinvestment began in housing near downtown central business

districts (CBD) (Zukin, 1987).

Brownfield development, or the re-development of pre-existing sites, began in

1974 in Vancouver in the Downtown and West End areas (Gordon, M., personal

communication, March 16, 2010). The increased re-development, particularly

towards housing, was partially a response to vacancies of space in the CBD when

many Canadian firms were taken over by or merged with other international

corporations and also because many US companies left Vancouver in the late 1970s,

choosing to centralize their resources in larger cities, like Toronto (Barnes and

Hutton, 2009), and outsourcing to other cheaper countries like India (Hall, 1997). In

the mid-1980s, Vancouver began to become a truly post-industrial city with a growing

knowledge and cultural economy, supporting film studies, computer services, new

media and design, architects, advertising and artists (Barnes and Hutton, 2009).

Further increases in housing were fuelled by a zoning change in the mid-1980s to

convert the False Creek Flats area from commercial to residential space (Hutton, T.,

PLAN 548S lecture, October 13, 2009), and conversions of previous office buildings

into condominiums (Barnes and Hutton, 2009).

One of the largest events that led to the creation of housing close to the CBD

was the sale of former Expo ’86 lands (now the Yaletown area) from the Province of

British Columbia to developers Concord-Pacific for $320 million (Gordon, M.,

personal communication, March 16, 2010; Barnes and Hutton, 2009). Shortly after,

the City of Vancouver encouraged locating housing close to the CBD in its 1991

Central Area Plan (City of Vancouver, 1991). Around this time, a new economy

emerged that focused on professional and creative services such as computer

graphics, video games and internet-based businesses. New economy firms began to

establish in the new housing and former industrial areas, often in newly created

live/work studios (Barnes and Hutton, 2009). Although this did not create immediate

dislocation effects, the areas of the Downtown Eastside and Strathcona experienced

the shadow effects of the new developments. Increasingly expensive urban design

features and consumption amenities in Yaletown such as upscale organic food

markets and posh restaurants furthered the gentrification process (Ibid.).


Gentrification has been documented as far back as 1964 by Ruth Glass, who first

identified it as the residential movement of the middle-class into London’s low-income

areas (Glass, 1964). Other scholars have noted that gentrification involves the

movement of low-income residents farther from the CBD and that these displacees

usually pay a higher rent, no matter where they move (Zukin, 1987; LeGates and

Hartan, 1986; Kain and Apgar, 1985).

Indeed this is true in the Vancouver case as the increase in amenities

surrounding the new housing areas also caused increases in housing prices and

rent. Zukin discusses the roles of artists in the gentrification process in her book Loft

Living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change. She notes that “the amenity that a

concentrated arts presence offers to middle-class and upper-class arts consumers

makes it possible to charge high prices for the housing that is eventually built nearby”

(Zukin, 1982: 111). The creative types that had first moved in due to the lower rents

are pushed out as the land values rise when buildings are redeveloped or renovated.

The effects of gentrification in other cities have been well documented in the cases of

SOMA in San Francisco (Jarvis and Pratt, 2006) as well as New York, London and

Paris (Carpenter and Lees, 2009).

Higher rental and housing prices are also the product of higher taxes on land

re-zoned from industrial to residential use and from increased construction costs of

Figure 4: Concord-Pacific developments Source: sashafatcat, 2008


condominium buildings for common spaces and other operating costs of

development associated with brownfield sites (Regional Analytics Inc., 2002). If this

pattern continues, artists will be pushed further and further away from the CBD, and

in the most extreme case, may disappear from the city altogether if not protected by

zoning or other policy measures.

Another concern with the re-zoning and redevelopment of brownfield sites is

that they are very hard, if not impossible, to reverse back to industrial use. Jacquie

Gijssen, Senior Cultural Planner of the City of Vancouver’s Cultural Services

department remarks that some people assume that all vacant old buildings on

industrial space should be available for redevelopment (Gijssen, J., personal

communication, March 16, 2010). However, this is not the case. Christina DeMarco,

the Senior Planner at the Policy and Planning Department at Metro Vancouver

emphasizes the importance of maintaining an adequate supply of industrial land

(DeMarco, 2008), and City of Vancouver Assistant Director of Citywide & Regional

Planning Ronda Howard agrees that industrial land cannot be simply re-located

(Stewart, 2006). Once divided, industrial land is also hard to reassemble. These

issues make re-zoning of industrial land a difficult issue. The Greater Vancouver

Regional District and the City of Vancouver estimate that the Greater Vancouver

region will run out of available industrial land by 2015 if they continue developing at

current rates (Stewart, 2006). It is for these reasons that land use planning must be

an iterative process based on stakeholder negotiation that is open and adaptable to

changing conditions (Amler et al., 1999), and carefully sets out its planning values

and principles.

Cultural planning also plays an important role in providing affordable studio

space for artists. Cultural planning, or the strategic planning for cultural resources,

amenities and facilities in a community or regional area, emerged as early as the

1970s in the USA and the mid-1980s in Australia through the work of Robert McNulty

and Colin Mercer (McNulty, 1992; Mercer, 1991; Grogan et al., 1995). The need for

access to culture was also emphasized in the United Nations World Commission on

Culture and Development’s report Our Creative Diversity (United Nations, 1995). The

integration of cultural planning into government policy documents can be traced back

to the 1990s in the Queensland Local Government Act (Mercer, 2006). Many other

countries, particularly in Europe, also recognized the importance of cultural planning


and national studies of the economic impact of the arts were conducted in the UK

(Myerscough 1988, Casey et al., 1996, DCMS 1998), The Netherlands (Kloosterman

and Elfring, 1991), Wales (Bryan et al. 1998) and the USA (Heilbrun and Gray,

1993). Furthermore, the cities of Berlin and Paris have conducted studies into the

affordability of studio space, and both are seeking to incorporate this matter into land

use plans (Burtenshaw et al., 1991; Kotowski and Frohling, 1993; Berger-Vachon,

1992; Evans 2001). Today, the meaning of cultural planning can be extended

beyond simply cultural policy to also include the arts and heritages of a place; the

local traditions, dialects, festivals and rituals; the diversity and quality of leisure;

cultural, drinking and eating and entertainment facilities; the cultures of youth, ethnic

minorities and communities of interest; as well as local products and skills in the

crafts, manufacturing and service sectors (Ghilardi, 2001). When put into practice,

Ghilardi (2001) and Castells (1989) condone cultural planning on a local level

because it allows for culture to be linked to economic and social elements, rather

than an isolated experience. In this way, cultural planning is not defined as the

‘planning of culture’, but rather “a cultural (anthropological) approach to urban

planning and policy” (Bianchini and Ghilardi, 1997); Ghilardi, 2001).

In the twenty-first century, culture has advanced into an industry (Roodhouse,

2006; Kunzmann, 2004). In fact, the Department of Canadian Heritage has found

that the arts and culture sector is the fastest-growing employer in the Canadian

economy, providing $22.4 billion in jobs (Wyman, 2004). Kunzmann has emphasized

that not only is this a growing sector, but a profitable sector (Kunzmann, 2004). It

has been estimated that each municipal dollar invested in arts and culture

operational and project grants generates $13 in revenue (Artscape, 2008). In

Vancouver, the Creative City Task Force was set up in December of 2004 to

determine the City’s role in the development of the arts, culture, community

celebrations, and special events (City of Vancouver, 2009c). More recently, the City

of Vancouver has created a Cultural Plan (Creative City Task Force, 2008) to detail

its courses of action for ten years (2008-2018). Additionally, the City commissioned

a Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan for 2008-2023, which will be further discussed in

this paper’s Vancouver section.


The Vancouver Case “In the context of Vancouver’s rising real estate values, finding affordable, appropriate and accessible rehearsal and studio space has been broadly articulated as one of Vancouver’s overwhelming challenges.” (Artscape, 2008:39)

Economic Profile of the Vancouver Artist

Vancouver makes an interesting case as it has been recently deemed the most

unaffordable of 28 Canadian housing markets and 272 international metropolitan

markets, as reported in the Frontier Centre for Public Policy’s sixth annual

Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey. Vancouver’s “Median

Multiple” (median house price divided by gross annual median household income) of

9.3 indicates that on average, the equivalent of nine years’ household income (9.3 x

median household income of $47,299 = $439,880) is needed to purchase a home.

The reason for such a high median multiple is that ocean and mountains bound

Vancouver, causing a shortage of land (Cox, 2010; Morton, 2010; Lazaruk, 2010).

There are also indications that the average price of housing has surpassed pre-

recession levels and will continue to increase since reaching the recession low in

May 2009 (Penner, 2010).

At the same time, out of 93 cities in Canada, Vancouver was found to have the

largest concentration of artists at 2.35% of the population, which is three times the

Canadian average of 0.77% (Hill, 2009). Vancouver was also found to have the

highest percentage increase in artists during the period from 1991 to 2006. Although

the local labour force grew by only 28%, increase in the number of artists during this

time was 76% in Vancouver, compared to a 42% growth in the number of artists in

Toronto and 33% in Montreal (Ibid). Further emphasizing the high concentration of

artists in the city, Hill found that 31% of BC’s artists reside in Vancouver, whereas

only 15% of the province’s overall labour force lives in the city (Ibid). The 8,155

artists that responded to the 2006 Census earned on average an income of $27,100,

compared to an average of $35,000 for all BC workers (Ibid).

The average Vancouver artist income relative to the 2006 average gross rent

for Vancouver areas is displayed in the table below. Although it can be


acknowledged that the income for the average Vancouver artist does not necessarily

represent that individual’s entire household income, the percentage of one-person

households in each of the three neighbourhoods ranges from 45-62% (City of

Vancouver Community Services, 2009). This means that approximately half of the

households in this area are one-person households, compared to the entire City of

Vancouver where 39% of households are one-person households (City of Vancouver

Community Services, 2009). The Shelter Cost-to-Income Ratio (STIR) measures the

percentage of income used towards housing (Statistics Canada, 2008). The Canada

Mortgage and Housing Corporation consider a STIR above 30% to be unaffordable

(Ibid). In this case, the STIR (rental) value is for the cost of rental units only and

does not take into account the cost of purchasing a home or mortgage payments.

Table 1: Median Household Income, Average Gross Rent and STIR (rental) by Area, 2006.*

Area Median Household Income, 2006α

Average gross rent (per month), 2006α

Average gross rent (per annum), 2006

STIR (rental) for 2006 average Vancouver Artist Income ($27,100 CAD)

STIR (rental) for Median Household Income, 2006

City of Vancouver

$47,299 $898 $10,776 39.76% 22.78%

Mount Pleasant

$37,782 $772 $9,264 34.18% 24.52%

Strathcona & DTESβ

$15,558 $500 $6,000 22.14% 38.57%

Grandview-Woodland

$35,342 $715 $8,580 31.66% 24.28%

* All dollar values in CAD α Source: City of Vancouver Community Services, 2009 β Data for Strathcona and the Downtown Eastside were combined in the City of Vancouver Community Services statistics.

The table shows that out of the three neighbourhoods, the only area that is affordable

for renting artists earning the average artist income is Strathcona/DTES. However,

this is also the only area in which the local STIR is higher than that for artists. Based

solely on economic calculations without taking policy or personal preferences into

account, these statistics suggest that artists from elsewhere may choose to move

into this area, displacing the local residents. Artists are more likely to be able to


afford higher rents in this area on informal or formal live/work spaces, potentially

crowding out the local residents, and it is likely that this has already occurred in this

neighbourhood. Although it is true that there are also a larger proportion of artists in

this neighbourhood than anywhere else in the city (suggesting that the artists are the

residents), the percentage of artists in this neighbourhood only make up 5.0% of the

local neighbourhood population (Artscape, 2008), demonstrating that artists from

other neighbourhoods could still potentially displace Strathcona and DTES residents

for existing housing stock if low-income local residents are not protected by policies

or restrictions on their spaces. The addition of new housing stock may have a similar

direct or indirect effect, but would be adding spaces, rather than directly displacing

local residents.

One important factor to note is that these estimates are for renting a space

only, at market prices. The rental case would take into account live/work situations,

but not artists wishing to be homeowners, who will face a STIR much higher in

mortgage payments. Those artists who will be renting a studio in addition to a

residential space face the potential of a STIR up to double this amount. The City of

Vancouver acknowledges that the unaffordability of facilities affects artists greatly

(City of Vancouver Cultural Services, 2009a) and over its history has tried various

methods to respond to this situation.

History of Live/Work Studios in Vancouver Live/work studios have existed in Vancouver since 1987, spearheaded in a

movement by city staff to increase the profile of arts, culture and creativity in the city

(Smith and Warfield, 2007; J. Gijssen, personal communication, April 1, 2010). As of

2008, there were approximately 1500 artist live/work studios in the city (Artscape,

2008). These live/work studios were originally intended for culture‐focused creativity

such as visual and performing artists but through time became popular with those in

the technology-based fields of the new economy, especially new media. The city at

the time did not define what was “creative” and only provided space for what an

individual themselves should decide as “creative” and as a pursuit that should be

funded (Smith and Warfield, 2007). As such, a number of economically‐focused

creative individuals, rather than completely culture‐focused artists were housed in the

live/work studios. Smith describes succinctly that in the Vancouver case, “[t]he


live/work zoning is a relatively value‐free initiative to foster creativity—it provides a

”container” for creativity but not restrictions on the content” (Ibid:17). The City of

Vancouver’s current Live-work Use Guidelines (City of Vancouver, 2006a) continue

to specify what kinds of building guidelines should be followed for the construction of

live/work spaces but does not clearly define kinds of uses may be found within, nor to

what extent. The guidelines do not stipulate that a live/work studio is to be the

occupant’s primary residence nor the amount of work conducted, thus the occupants

may use these studios as only work or only living space. The guidelines continue to

maintain that these spaces are for the production of “art” but this is difficult to define,

as well as to confirm. Other cities such as the Planning Department in San Francisco

also acknowledge difficulties confirming the uses that take place within their city’s

live/work studios (Parker and Pascual, 2002), as does the section of the Cultural

Facilities Priorities Plan dealing with Vancouver’s live/work studios (Artscape, 2008).

The City of Vancouver’s current live/work use guidelines can be found at:

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20060321/documents/motiona2.pdf

City of Vancouver Land Use and Development Policies and Guidelines

Community Amenity Contributions, Density Bonus and Transfer of Density for

Heritage Preservation are important land-use tools that can be used to procure studio

space from new developments. Developers wishing to change an existing zoning, for

example, commercial to residential, are usually subject to a Community Amenity

Contribution (CAC). CACs can take the form of a monetary contribution or an

amenity provided in-kind by the development, and is decided on a case-by-case

basis. The City compares the land value prior to rezoning with the projected land

value and the difference is called the lift in land value. The expected amount of the

CAC is about 80% of the land lift. CACs can be used on-site, or located in the

community where the rezoning takes place. CACs could be used to provide

affordable studio space for artists in a building re-designated as a mixed-use

(live/work) space, as exemplified by the case of The Edge in Vancouver, discussed in

the section of this report ‘City of Vancouver Initiatives in Affordable Studio Space’

(City of Vancouver, 2006b; Coriolis Consulting Corp., 2007).


Density Bonuses are available to developers that invest in cultural

infrastructure and social housing, among other community amenities. These

investments can be on-site or in the same neighbourhood. Building density is a ratio

of a development’s floor space to its property area. The developer can use its extra

density, or density bonus, to build a development to a higher density. This usually

translates into more units, and a more profitable investment for the developer but the

community also benefits by receiving a new amenity. This was the case for many of

the Concord-Pacific developments in current-day Yaletown, where parks and other

amenities were provided in exchange for density bonuses. In the future, the City may

also want to consider increasing opportunities that exchange bonus density for the

amenity of affordable studio space. An example that takes advantage of this kind of

policy is Toronto’s Artscape Triangle Lofts, discussed in the case studies.

To offset the costs of maintaining heritage buildings, the City currently offers a

heritage density bonus in exchange for the legal designation and preservation of

certain properties as a heritage site. This means that the City can use by-laws to

regulate alterations, construction and demolition of the building. In the Transfer of

Density for Heritage Preservation program, accrued heritage density is deposited into

a “heritage density bank”, which the developer can draw from to use on another

development, or sell to another builder. The Density Transfer for Heritage

Preservation program can only be used within designated Vancouver areas. This

means that generally, density can be transferred away from but not into the DTES

and Strathcona areas. Mount Pleasant and Grandview-Woodlands are currently not

included in this program (City of Vancouver, 2002a; City of Vancouver, 2002b;

Coriolis Consulting Corp., 2007).

Vancouver currently differentiates artist studios into Class A and B categories.

Class A studios can be used for the production of dance, music, creative writing,

painting, drawing, pottery, sculpture, video and moving or still photography. Class B

studios accommodate a greater range of uses, by also allowing industrial processes,

on-site film processing, and the production of art involving amplified sound (City of

Vancouver, 1996; City of Vancouver, 2010).


More information concerning the land use and development policies and guidelines

for Vancouver can be found at:

Community Amenity Contributions:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/C025.pdf

Density Bonusing:

http://vancouver.ca/COMMSVCS/PLANNING/heritage/casestudies/CS_Dens.htm

Transfer of Density for Heritage Preservation:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/Guidelines/T001.pdf

Class A and B studios:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/gasp/awards/artiststudio/tour.htm

A discussion paper that outlines the use of amenity contributions in several Western

Canadian municipalities, including Vancouver can be found at:

http://www.victoria.ca/cityhall/pdfs/plnpln_downtown_amnty_cntrbt.pdf

City of Vancouver Initiatives in Affordable Artist Studio Space The City of Vancouver has aimed to address some of the issues associated with

affordable studio space in the city by developing an Artist Studio Award program. Of

the four studios available, one is an Award Studio (Class B) that is provided rent-free

by the City. The other three studios are subject to a monthly rent of $375 CAD per

month. The City owns one of the three low-rent studios. Developers lease the

remaining two to the City for a certain period of time. Two of these are Class B

studios and one is Class A. All studios were created through various development

conditions. The studios are awarded through a competitive juried process for a lease

of three years (City of Vancouver, 2010).

In 1995, the City also acquired 37,000 square feet of artist live/work space at a

discounted rate from the developer of The Edge at Gore Avenue and Alexander

Street in exchange for re-zoning the land from industrial (M-2) to mixed industrial and

artist live/work studios (CD-1). Thirty units were leased to CORE, a co-operative of

artists that have previously lived and worked in the neighbourhood (Jessup, 2000;

North Sky Consulting Ltd, 2007). The units are targeted to low- and moderate-


income artists at rents of either $325 CAD or $575 CAD per month (City of

Vancouver Community Services, 2005a).

Information on these initiatives can be found at:

City of Vancouver’s Artist Studio Award Program:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/gasp/awards/artiststudio/index.htm

The Edge/CORE Co-op: http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/000201/a2.htm

Cultural Plans for Vancouver To set in place the City’s cultural priorities, a cultural study was commissioned by the

City of Vancouver and a 15-year Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan (2008-2023) was

developed by Toronto-based consultants Artscape (Artscape, 2008), with the support

of many Vancouver artists and cultural organizations. In fact, Amir Ali Alibhai,

Executive Director of the BC-based organization Alliance for Arts and Culture,

describes it as the “communities plan” (J. Gijssen, personal communication, April 1,

2010). This Plan acknowledged that it is difficult to provide affordable studio space in

the city, as these spaces usually need to be located in old factories and underutilized

warehouses to keep the rent affordable. Vancouver, however, does not have many

of these types of old buildings, and the ones that exist have largely been converted

into high-end residential and office lofts (Artscape, 2008; North Sky Consulting Ltd,

2007). An additional challenge is that funding sources are limited. Neither Metro

Vancouver nor the Province of British Columbia has formal programs to support arts

and cultural infrastructure (Ibid). On the whole, the Province of British Columbia

provides far less funds to arts and culture than other provinces. In 2009, there was a

26% cut to the BC Provincial Arts and Culture investment, whereas no other province

in Canada had reduced their support for the arts during the economic crisis (Alliance

for Arts and Culture, 2009a). In 2010, funding to the arts decreased further, resulting

in a 32% cut from 2008 levels (Assembly of BC Arts Councils, 2010). As a result,

much of the cost burden for arts and cultural facilities in Vancouver currently falls to

the City of Vancouver.

Taking into account feedback received from the cultural study and

Vancouver’s affordability challenges, the Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan

recommends that a pilot project feasibility study of artist studios should be


undertaken (Artscape, 2008). The City of Vancouver City Council adopted the

Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan in June 2008 and a $20,000 feasibility study into the

creation of artist studios was to be commissioned as part of the Phase I

implementation of this plan but could not be completed due to funding cuts (Gijssen,

2008; J. Gijssen, personal communication, March 9, 2010). From the

recommendations of the Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan, the Cultural Services is

seeking to conduct an interdepartmental review to co-ordinate arts and cultural

facility needs with the Zoning and Development By-Law, the Building By-Law, and

Licensing and Permit processes (Gijssen, 2008), as well as investigate opportunities

to enhance the creation of artist studios, working in concert with other city

departments (J. Gijssen, personal communication, April 1, 2010). Additionally,

Cultural Services would like to undertake an inventory of multi-tenant artist studios (J.

Gijssen, personal communication, March 16, 2010).

Another important finding from the Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan is the lack

of local experience in studio development and operation. Vancouver’s artists and

cultural non-profit community have great potential but have had limited exposure to

facility creation and management. Also absent from Vancouver is a local

organization directed towards the development of artists’ space, such as those found

in the Toronto and Minneapolis case study examples of this report. Therefore, the

Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan has recommended that the 5 year (Phase I)

Implementation should focus on addressing this issue (Artscape, 2008; J. Gijssen,

personal communication, April 1, 2010).

Sacco, Williams and Del Bianco have also created recommendations for the

arts in Vancouver in their Vancity-funded document “The Power of the Arts in

Vancouver: Creating a Great City” (Sacco et al., 2007). In it, they advocate for a new

Arts Hub and or Community Learning Centre in the Downtown Eastside as well as a

Creative Industries and Arts Incubator at the Great Northern Way campus (Ibid). An

Arts Hub would provide meeting space, networking and volunteer opportunities, as

well as reinforce a shared identity in the city. Sacco et al. believe this would help to

address the “identitarian divide between the east and west” in Vancouver (Ibid:42).

They picture a Creative Industries or Arts Incubator would help direct graduating and

recent graduates in a manner that will lead them in their entrepreneurial development

as artists. Sacco and his colleagues have championed the idea of bringing together

complementary uses in the same space; other studies including the City’s Cultural


Facilities Plan have identified similar opportunities.

The Creative City Task Force’s 2008-2012 City Culture Plan can be found at:

http://vancouver.ca/creativecity/pdf/CulturePlan2008_%202018.pdf

The Artscape & the City of Vancouver’s Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan can be

found at: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/policy/plan/pdf/CulturalFacilities.pdf

The Phase I Implementation of the Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan can be found at:

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20080626/documents/csb5.pdf

The Sacco et al.’s Vancity-funded plan, “The Power of the Arts in Vancouver:

Creating a Great City “ can be found at:

http://www.theholmteam.ca/votewendy/media/PowerOfTheArts.pdf

Recent Vancouver Projects

Although Vancity cannot provide much funding itself for affordable studio space

projects, they have been involved in the negotiation and organization of some

initiatives. One example is the group of artists located at 901 Main Street whose

building had been taken over by developers. One of the displaced artists was Eri

Ishii. In an attempt to find a second space, she tirelessly wrote press releases and

with other artists, and met with the developer and the City to negotiate a solution.

She mentions that at first, the City had no knowledge that the artists were at risk, but

they were soon informed of the situation and earnestly helped the artists negotiate

with the developer, as mentioned in the introduction of this report. After one and a

half years of negotiations the artists found that there was ultimately a disconnection

between the developer and the artists in terms of language and objectives so Ishii

and her colleagues decided to find space on their own (E. Ishii, personal

communication, March 17, 2010).

The City and Vancity encouraged the artists to form a co-operative, and 901

Artists Co-op became the first registered studio co-op in British Columbia. Ishii

relayed that starting a co-op was a difficult process but she wanted to do it to dispel

the myth that artists are disorganized and lazy. 901 Artists Co-op received funding

from both the B.C. Co-op Association and Building Opportunities with Business

(B.O.B.) to help pay for training from co-op experts. Vancity helped the co-op to


negotiate a new 5-year lease at 150 MacLean (Meggs, 2009; E. Del Bianco, personal

communication, March 10, 2010). Del Bianco estimates that if these artists had not

banded together to form a co-operative, they would have likely been without studio

space (personal communication, March 10, 2010). Ishii also credits a landlord

interested in the arts as a key component to their success. The artists renovated the

space themselves and spent only $100 CAD doing so by using existing resources

they had on hand. This was fortunate as most funding for co-operatives is stipulated

for hiring co-operative experts to administer training, rather than for infrastructural

needs. Providing spaces at $1.15 CAD/ square foot for co-op members and $1.35

CAD for non-co-op members, Ishii calculated that the co-op makes about $160 CAD

per month. The co-operative is hoping to use their savings to eventually lease

additional studio locations for more artists (E. Ishii, personal communication, March

17, 2010).

Ideally, Del Bianco says Vancity would like to work towards models that are

also economically profitable, and once again, that incorporate a variety of uses. He

cites 401 Richmond in Toronto as an example, which has a mix of studio spaces,

coffee shops, galleries and non-profits located in the same building.

Another trailblazer in the realm of affordable studio space is David Duprey. A

restaurant-owner, photographer and contractor, Duprey considers himself a mediator

between artists and property owners in the Downtown Eastside. He has invested in

spaces by renovating them himself and later passes on these savings to the artists

he leases them to. As an example, the Goonies Gallery at 108 East Hastings Street

pays about 75 cents per square foot month, whereas even Single-Room Occupancy

(SRO) apartments in the area cost around $3.50 CAD. He also mentions that

because he understands the development language and has knowledge of

renovation requirements he is able to finish his projects much more quickly and

easily than an individual or group starting from scratch. Since 2007, he has leased

nine buildings across the city and is currently working on two more buildings located

at 110 and 112 East Hastings Street (E. Del Bianco, personal communication, March

10, 2010; Stothers, 2009; Vancouver Courier, 2008).

Some of Duprey’s buildings have been part of the City of Vancouver’s Great

Beginnings program. As part of the Great Beginnings program, the Hastings

Renaissance initiative is revitalizing six storefronts and buildings along Hastings

Street by training and employing DTES residents to assist in the renovations. By


renovating rather than re-constructing new buildings along Hastings, the City aims for

less displacement (new buildings would mean higher rent than old ones) and gradual

re-development. The Hastings Renaissance is scheduled to run from March 2009 to

September 2010. Most of the completed storefronts will support arts-based

businesses. Two of the six buildings will be for artist studios (City of Vancouver,

2009a; City of Vancouver, 2009b). A concern for the Hastings Renaissance,

however, is its long-term effects. This project may have un-intentional impacts on the

long-term security of arts groups in the area as no plan is in place to respond to or

combat potential gentrification. In addition to the Hastings Renaissance program, the

City of Vancouver also offers funding opportunities such as Heritage Façade

Rehabilitation Program to enhance the appearance of buildings within certain areas

of Vancouver (City of Vancouver Community Services, 2005b). A major funding

source recently created is the Cultural Infrastructure Grant Program, which applies to

a greater breath of uses for Vancouver-based non-profit cultural organizations (City

of Vancouver Cultural Services, 2009b). Approximately 40 non-profit cultural groups

also receive support from the City through free or nominal rents. These through city-

owned or city-leased spaces were created through Community Amenity Contributions

and Bonus Density agreements (J. Gijssen, personal communication, April 1, 2010;

City of Vancouver, 2002c).

A few centres have come together to share production space as well as

provide room for compatible uses. One example is VIVO, an artist-run non-profit

media production, exhibition and distribution centre that welcomes new members.

VIVO is equipped with production equipment, studio space, audio, video and new

media post-production facilities (VIVO Media Arts Centre, 2009). Looking forward to

the future, the W2 media arts centre will open up in summer 2010 in the City’s

Woodward’s building. W2 is a local culture and media house currently operating

across the street at 112 West Hastings. The new facility will have a letterpress studio,

performance space, a media production lab, a writing school, a youth media lab,

multi-purpose community rooms, a TV studio, as well as various social enterprises

(café, letterpress studio, digital printing centre). The centre has formed a

partnership with Simon Fraser University (SFU) to give students a chance to work

with local residents. W2’s Creative Technology Incubator will also help mentor DTES

residents that want to pursue the media arts as their livelihood (W2 Community

Media Arts, 2010a; W2 Community Media Arts, 2010b; Trouton, 2009).


Building Opportunities with Business, a non-profit organization interested in

inclusive revitalization through existing businesses and residents, can be found at:

http://www.buildingopportunities.org/

For more information about co-operatives, the B.C. Co-op association can be found

at: http://bcca.coop/

Questions about Vancity’s initiatives with affordable artist studio space can be

directed to Elvy Del Bianco: [email protected]

Eri Ishii, from 901 Artists Co-op can be contacted at: [email protected]

For more information, visit:

401 Richmond: http://www.401richmond.net/

Great Beginnings & Hastings Renaissance:

http://vancouver.ca/greatbeginnings/aboutus.htm

Heritage Façade Rehabilitation Program:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/chinatown/pdfs/HBRP_Brochure.pdf

Cultural Infrastructure Grant Program:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/gasp/grants/facilities/index.htm

VIVO: http://www.videoinstudios.com/

W2 Woodwards:

http://www.creativetechnology.org/overview/page/show?id=2128459%3APage%3A3

531


Case Studies

Selected case studies have been carefully chosen to identify encouraging examples

that artists can learn from when searching for affordable studio space options. These

examples are ones that have been well received in other cities and ones that

Vancouver could learn from and adopt into its arts, community, economic and

planning strategies, policies and discussions. Although these examples have been

successful within their local contexts, these strategies may not be directly

transferable to the Vancouver case in their entirety. Instead, successful elements or

important lessons should be drawn from each case to contribute to the growing

conversation about affordable studio space provision in the Vancouver context. The

case studies cover a wide range of situations from small start-up projects to more

complex endeavours co-ordinated amongst several bodies and organizations. The

diversity of approaches show the different options available to artists depending on

what resources he or she may have at hand, but also demonstrate ambitious

precedents that artists could strive for over time.

UK - VILLAGE UNDERGROUND (LONDON)

Auro Foxcroft is the visionary behind the Village Underground project, which has

reused old London tube cars to produce an innovative and environmentally friendly

solution to the shortage of studio space in Shoreditch, in the East End of London.

Perched upon an old Victorian warehouse and at a rent of $30 CAD a week, the

Underground cars are a bright and very affordable location to work from (Durham,

2008).

As a furniture designer with a creative new idea, Foxcroft quickly found out

that old tube cars with about 500 sq feet could be easily acquired for the cost of £500

or about $1000 Canadian dollars. Compared to the average price for office space in

the $50 CAD per square foot range, the tube cars seemed like a great alternative.

Securing a building that would agree to host the cars, as well as pay for a crane to do

so were Foxcroft’s largest challenges. Since his idea was so new, only one bank

was willing to provide a loan - at an interest rate of 22% for such a risky idea.

Government funding was limited (London Rebuilding Society, 2006a).


Foxcroft turned to the London

Rebuilding Society (LRS), a community

development finance institution, to help make

his dream a reality. The LRS helped

Foxcroft to secure the space of an old 4,000

square foot warehouse, which now functions

as Village Underground’s music and cultural

centre, hosting gallery displays and fashion

shows, sometimes serving as a nightclub

and occasionally used as a film shooting or

screening location. With the funding

provided by the LRS, four tube cars have

been cleared of their seats and refurbished

using sustainable materials. The cars also

incorporate carbon-neutral heat and power as

well as a rooftop garden (Ibid).

A CBC News article about the project relays Foxcroft’s advice to others with

new and ambitious ideas: “ ‘Try and enlist the support of the people who inspire you

the most be they film stars, politicians, musicians or artists and shoot as high as you

can’ “ (Durham, 2008). The article continues by citing that “Foxcroft credits the office

of former London mayor Ken Livingstone with being open to the concept” (Ibid).

Foxcroft is considering extending his project in Canada by placing old subway cars

on a roof in Toronto (Ibid).

Although Vancouver does not have an excess of old subway cars for the same

purpose, the creative and resourceful use of existing supplies is an aim that can be

applied to Vancouver. Foxcroft was also fortunate to be able to rely on a resource

such as the London Rebuilding Society. An increase of such societies could also be

a future aim for Vancouver.

The London Rebuilding Society (LRS) is a “Community Development Finance

Institution which targets the most socially deprived, financially excluded and hardest

to reach communities in the Greater London area” (London Rebuilding Society,

2006b). In addition to lending money to social enterprises unable to secure loans

Figure 5: Village Underground Source: Perdeaux, 2008


from conventional sources, the LRS provides financial advice on costing, marketing,

profit and loss, as well as how to write a business plan. The mission of the Society is

that the funds they lend to regenerate and develop local communities are a way of

supporting the local economy which will benefit the entire community overall through

“a domino effect” (London Rebuilding Society, 2006b; London Rebuilding Society,

2006b). Website: http://www.londonrebuilding.com/

More information on Village Underground can be found online at:

http://www.londonrebuilding.com/information/89713/90262/90554/90536/village_und

erground/ & http://www.villageunderground.co.uk/

UK - ACME STUDIOS (LONDON)

Acme Studios is a London-based charity, formed by artists Jonathan Harvey and

David Panton in 1972, which provides artists with affordable studio and living space.

Possessing a combination of permanent sites and buildings on lease, the average

cost of a studio is £9.40 per sq ft per year (around $14.35 CAD), or £196 ($300 CAD)

per month for 250 square feet of studio space. Acme estimates this cost to be one-

third of comparable studios (Acme Studios, 2010a).

In addition to the over 400 studio units at 12 sites, Acme also supports

work/live and studio residency schemes as well as an international residencies

programme (Acme Studios, 2010b; Acme Studios, 2010c). The domestic work/live

and studio residency schemes provide a free studio or work/live unit plus a grant.

Twenty-four recipients are selected to fulfil particular categories of artists: student,

location-based artists, current Acme tenants and artists whose work focuses on

social engagement (Acme Studios, 2010d). The international residencies

programme works in the same manner but partners with institutions in 6 countries

(Australia, Canada, Germany, Portugal, Sweden and Switzerland) to determine

which 22 artists will be chosen for the award each year (Acme Studios, 2010e).

Acme’s long-term goal to “to create a permanent and sustainable network of

affordable, accessible and high-quality studios for artists in London” (Acme Studios,

2010b), has led it to help positively shape the affordable studio sector in England.

Acme provides an advisory service on studio provision to funding bodies, local

government, other studio organizations, development agencies and artists. One of


its largest projects has been, in conjunction with Arts Council England and other

studio organizations, to establish the National Federation of Artists’ Studio Providers.

The establishment of such a body helps to identify where the gaps and overlaps lay,

as well as which organizations could potentially work together on future initiatives.

Acme has also had a role in promoting Capital Studios, an advocacy programme for

affordable studio providers in London (Ibid). To date, Acme estimates that it has

helped more than 5,000 artists. Acme Studios is funded by Arts Council England

(Ibid).

With federal support, Acme studios has developed into a network dedicated to

the objective of affordable studio space provision. Although Acme has more funding,

London also has a more established arts and culture community than that found in

Vancouver. To be able to reach the status of Acme’s success in Vancouver, capacity

within the arts and culture community needs to be built up. One way this could be

encouraged is through increased communication and closer ties to Acme and other

such organizations to thoroughly understand their functional structures and how

these could be adopted for Vancouver.

More information about Acme Studios can be found at: http://www.acme.org.uk/

CANADA - FIRST NATIONS CO-OPERATIVE (VICTORIA)

Located in downtown Victoria, B.C., the First Nations Co-operative (an unregistered

co-operative) was the initiative of Shirley Blackstar and Chris MacDonald who had

the idea of creating a co-operative as a way for First Nations artists to pool their

resources together. Their original vision was a gallery space in which artists would

be able to showcase and sell their work. Their idea received strong support from

First Nations artists in their community, so Blackstar and MacDonald (a former

business manager) developed a business plan, set up an operating budget and

located a promising site for the project. After negotiating a reasonably priced lease,

the initial operating expenses, renovations, inventory and two months’ advance rent

totalled $20,000 CAD.

As the artists co-operative was newly formed and without any collateral or

credit, it did not have access to traditional loans. Therefore, Blackstar assumed

liabilities for the lease under the name of Tansi Trading (her own company) and the


gallery was started as a private endeavour. Although this was not the original intent

of the project, it was an unavoidable complication for a new co-operative. Blackstar

was able to secure a loan through the Tale'awtxw Aboriginal Capital Corporation, as

well as establish a line of credit with Coast Capital Savings, using her primary

residence as equity. Luckily, Blackstar also received a $21,000 CAD marketing grant

from Aboriginal Business Canada to cover 60% of the gallery’s marketing expenses.

Finally, the business opened on July 7, 2001 under the name of Eagle Feather

Gallery – First Nations Artists Gallery & Gift Shop. Artists wishing to work in the

studio of the gallery would be charged a $100 CAD per month space fee and a lower

25% commission on sales. Artists who did not find the space fee cost effective due

to lower sales could instead give the co-operative a 40% commission and no space

fee. The sales commissions on the artwork are intended to cover the operating

expenses. First Nations artists wishing for space in the gallery must first apply.

There are currently twelve members of this co-operative.

In addition to providing retail and studio space, the co-operative intends to

help artists develop their business by creating marketing material, tracking inventory

as well as teaching business skills to their members.

What the artists in this co-operative learned is to draw from whatever

resources are available. From the business expertise of Chris MacDonald to the time

and resources of volunteers, the co-operative constantly communicated their needs

and worked around their available assets. However, funding is an obvious

determinant of a co-operative’s success. Similarly, prospective projects of the co-

operative will also depend on what forms of funding can be secured in the future.

Above all, communication was and is fundamental to the co-operative’s

success. Both written handouts at meetings and face-to-face exchanges were and

are imperative for the First Nations Co-operative, especially in dealing with cultural

differences between all parties (MacDonald, 2001).

Although not yet incorporated as a co-operative, this example of the First

Nations Co-operative demonstrates what kinds of organization are needed within a

co-operative. It is important to draw from resources available, but also to find groups

or organizations that believe in the same cause. Studio space was not the primary


goal of the First Nations Artist Co-operative, but they showcase an informative

example of how gallery and studio space can exist cohesively as elements of a single

co-operative, offering the co-operative members a range of engagement methods.

The Tale'awtxw Aboriginal Capital Corporation is committed to supporting the

success of Aboriginal Businesses within the Coast Salish Traditional Territories with

business financing and support services. Website: http://www.tacc.ca/

Aboriginal Business Canada is a program of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

(INAC) that helps Aboriginal entrepreneurs and organizations to achieve their

business goals. Their website can be found at: http://www.ainc-

inac.gc.ca/ecd/ab/abc/index-eng.asp

More information on the First Nations Cooperative can be found at:

http://www.learningcentre.coop/resource/first-nations-artists-co-operative

More Information on forming co-operatives can be found from

The Co-operative Learning Centre: http://www.learningcentre.coop/

& ArtistsinCanada’s list of Co-operative Art Galleries:

http://www.artistsincanada.com/php/~cooperative.php

CANADA - ARTSCAPE TRIANGLE LOFTS (TORONTO) Artscape Triangle Lofts were not part of the original plan by developers Urbancorp for

Westside Gallery Lofts. The original Urbancorp development, located in Toronto’s

vibrant Queen West Triangle proposed several high-rise buildings of up to 15 storeys

in a low-rise neighbourhood home to many artist studios. Many of the local citizens,

residents and business-owners opposed the development and formed the group

Active 18 to deal with this issue (Gallant, 2010).

In order to mediate the situation, Artscape, a non-profit organization based in

Toronto, stepped in. Artscape invited both Urbancorp and Active 18 to a lunch so

that both sides could voice their concerns with an advisor at hand. Without intentions


of becoming developers at the time, Artscape eventually suggested an idea that

Urbancorp and Active 18 both agreed with. Working with the City of Toronto,

Artscape proposed that it would purchase the first three floors of the 15-storey

buildings at construction costs. In exchange, the developers would be able to build

the previously 15-storey towers up to a maximum of 18 storeys, which could be sold

at higher rates. In addition, the developer was required to provide $1.25 million CAD

to a performing arts centre nearby and $750,000 CAD for a new park. The current

sales office for Westside Gallery Lofts will also be converted into a gallery once units

have been sold (Mays, 2007). With the first three floors of the development,

amounting to 56,000 square feet, Artscape would build 70 affordable ownership and

rental live/work spaces available only to artists and non-profit arts professionals for

perpetuity. Artscape would be in charge of maintaining these affordable prices from

owner to owner. Artscape Triangle Lofts has their own entrance, with simpler

finishes and fewer amenities, which added up to a lower bottom line for the artists

(Gallant, 2010; Artscape, 2007; Byers 2007).

To fund this project, Artscape received a $1,000,000 CAD capital loan

guarantee from the City of Toronto. The loan covered legal, marketing and pre-

development activities before the units could be available for sale (Weldon, 2009).

The live/work studios at Artscape Triangle Lofts range from 500 square feet to 1,010

square feet. Of the total 70 units, 48 market units for artists and non-profit arts

professionals have now been 100% sold. The remaining 22 rental units are available

only to professional artists. All artists residing in the development must meet the

criteria of the Draft Canadian Artists’ Code, found on Artscape’s website at:

http://www.torontoartscape.on.ca/node/419. Artists must also submit their CV and a

Letter of Intent to Artscape’s Tenant Advisory Committee in order to be eligible

(Artscape, 2009). The monthly rent for a one-bedroom rental unit has been targeted

at $727 CAD, which is roughly 80% of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Canada’s

(CMHC) Average Market Rent (AMR) for Toronto (Artscape, 2007). As live/work

units, Artscape is able to draw from funding sources such as Ontario’s Affordable

Housing Program (AHP) that it would not be able to access as studio units alone.

Affordable financing options have also been negotiated by Artscape through the

Creative Arts Savings & Credit Union. The development also hopes to achieve

LEED certification upon completion. Artscape Triangle Lofts is scheduled for

occupancy in August 2010 (Artscape, 2009).


Tim Jones, President and CEO of Artscape credits the success of the project

to the relationships that the non-profit organization has built. “’ When I started at

Artscape 20 years ago, we'd be invited to come wave placards outside buildings

where people were being evicted. It's just not a very effective strategy…[b]y building

relationships with the right people we've been able get a lot of interesting things

happening. We're trying to get beyond the sorry story of artists as victims’" (Gallant,

2010).

One of the largest differences between this case and Vancouver is the

presence of Artscape. Vancouver does not yet have such an organization that is

dedicated to artist space issues. However, it is interesting to note the agreement that

the developer, the City of Toronto and Artscape were able to come to an agreement

to allow additional density, with the provision that artist space would be created.

Another commendable aspect of this case is the use of the Draft Canadian Artists’

Code to ensure that the space is reserved only for artists. The presence of the co-

ordinating body Artscape as owner of these units also ensures that these spaces

remain in the possession of artists and non-profit arts professionals for perpetuity.

Artscape is a not-for-profit urban development organization that revitalizes buildings,

neighbourhoods, and cities through the arts. For 20 years, Artscape has been

aiming to provide affordable space for creativity to thrive while also maintaining a

positive cultural, economic, social, and environmental impact. For more information

about Artscape, visit: http://www.torontoartscape.on.ca/

More information related to this case can be found at:

Artscape Triangle Lofts: http://www.artscapetrianglelofts.ca/

Active 18: http://active18.org/

CMHC’s AMR and Ontario’s AHP: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1117.aspx

Creative Arts Savings and Credit Union: http://www.creativeartscu.com/


US - OPEN CONTAINER V (SANTA BARBARA)

The Container Project first started when the

University of California, Santa Barbara’s

(UCSB) Institute for Research in the Arts

(UCIRA) partnered with Jorgen Staal of J.

Staal Storage Solutions to find a new use for

the many empty shipping containers that

were accumulating in Staal’s yard. Dealing in

the rental and sales of storage containers,

Staal was seeking a new and economically profitable project for the containers. He

agreed to donate containers to The Container Project to explore the possibilities. As

one initiative of The Container Project, Open Container was a studio class led by Kim

Yasuda, professor at UCSB and co-director of UCIRA, in which each class was given

free rein over three containers to design as they wished. The containers are

earthquake-resistant, weatherproof and built to withstand a 22-day voyage across the

Pacific Ocean from China to California. The

classes making up Open Container I through

IV created gallery space, a cinema, a mobile

and expandable exhibition/drawing station

and several habitation options. Materials for

the project were often donated by campus

vendors or found for free from online website

Craig’s List (http://www.craigslist.org/).

Open Container V was first

conceptualized in 2007 as studio space when the campus lost 10 undergraduate art

studios located in a condemned building. The class decided to build a cheap and

mobile prototype that could serve as temporary replacements. The result was a two-

container unit that did not have access to running water but explored methods of up-

to-code electrical, wind and solar power prototypes as well as a green roof. The

studio was home to two honours students in the following year. The container

studios also received conceptual approval by the campus planning division at UCSB

Figure 6: Open Container V, from outside Source: kimyasuda, 2007

Figure 7: Open Container V, inside Source: kimyasuda, 2007


for more container studios to be built as ‘temporary mobile art spaces’ (Yasuda,

2007a; Yasuda, 2007b; Kettman, 2007).

Like the Village Underground example, this case takes advantage of available

local resources. What is most interesting about this case is that although lacking

running water, the studio spaces that were created met building code requirements,

meaning that container studios can be a realistic idea for future studio space.

However, the studios created from this project were of a temporary nature, and to be

used within the university campus only. Further explorations and development of

containers, or other similar structures for the use of studio space could be useful if a

space for their location can be found. Also highlighted in this example is the

collaboration with a school to produce a product that benefits both the project

initiators and the students through a unique learning experience.

For more information about the Open Container V studios, visit:

http://www.ucira.ucsb.edu/ContainerProjects/Opencontainer.html

Other container projects that may be of interest:

The Shipyard: http://www.theshipyard.org/about.html

Cove Park: http://www.covepark.org/

Container City at Trinity Buoy Wharf: http://www.trinitybuoywharf.com/home.html

US - THE TILSNER CO-OPERATIVE & ARTSPACE PROJECTS, INC. (SAINT PAUL)

Before Artspace started its renovation, the Tilsner in Lowertown, Saint Paul,

Minnesota had no windows or roof and part of the top two floors were so deteriorated

that they could not bear human weight. Parts of the floors were punctuated with

holes made by past prospective developers who had all given up on renovating the

building as a worthwhile real estate investment. After Artspace had successfully

renovated the Northern Warehouse next door, the City of Saint Paul asked the non-

profit real estate developer to try its hand at the Tilsner space.


Renovations to the Tilsner cost $6.5 million USD and in exchange Artspace

produced 66 affordable live/work units for individuals and families, which range from

studios at 950 square feet to three-bedroom units at 2,200 square feet. The building

has a total of 139,360 square feet. Each unit has high ceilings, pine floors, exposed

brick walls, wood beams, large windows, and modern kitchens and baths. In

addition, Artspace also built skylights that fill two seven-storey atriums with natural

light, a gallery, meeting rooms, a workshop, a children’s playroom and a laundry

room on every level.

Since the Tilsner functions as a co-operative, its residents must participate in

one or more of the Tilsner’s committees, which help to facilitate community life.

However, involvement at the co-operative does also respect their members’ needs

for a family life, work and time for their artistic endeavours. Many Tilsner studios are

open to the public for the sale and exhibition of artwork in the twice-annual Saint Paul

Art Crawl, which takes place in Downtown and Lowertown St. Paul (Tilsner Artists’

Cooperative, 2003; Artspace Projects Inc., 2009a).

This example shows the available possibilities for areas where the capacity to

manage facility issues is strong. Artspace is a local organization equipped with both

knowledge of facility issues but also understanding of the local context. It should

also be noted that many American cities have a considerably greater stock of old

buildings that can be renovated, which is not necessarily the case in Vancouver.

However, the co-operative aspect of this project is a theme that is just beginning in

Vancouver with the 901 Artists Co-op, and communication with the Tilsner, as well as

other Artspace project could help Vancouver artists to understand what methods

make a co-operative successful, as well as what mistakes to avoid.

For more information about the Tilsner Artists’ Cooperative, visit:

http://tilsner.net/news/

About Artspace Projects

Artspace Projects, Inc. is an American non-profit real estate developer for the arts

based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Founded in 1979, Artspace owns and operates 24


projects in 17 cities and 12 states. The majority of the projects are live/work

buildings, which total 846 residential units. Other projects include non-residential

spaces such as studios, offices for arts organizations, rehearsal and performance

venues, and space for arts-friendly businesses.

Artspace projects typically take between three to five years to develop, as the

organization makes sure the project is fully funded before the project breaks ground.

Funding sources include: Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Historic Tax Credits,

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community

Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) funds,

Federal Home Loan Bank funds, Tax Increment Financing, city and state cultural

facility grants, a conventional first mortgage, and philanthropic gifts. Artspace also

makes use of federal, state and local financing available through established funding

programs targeting the creation of affordable housing and economic development

projects. In addition, all Artspace live/work projects qualify as affordable housing for

low- to moderate-income households under the IRS Code (Section 42).

Although anyone who qualifies for affordable housing is eligible to apply for

Artspace’s live/work units, preference is given to applicants who participate and are

committed to the arts. A Selection Committee interviews all applicants.

Artspace also maintains ownership of their projects when they are completed.

Tenant rents are used to pay the mortgage and operating costs on the projects.

Excess revenue is used for preventative maintenance, commons area improvements

and building upgrades (Artspace Projects Inc., 2009b).

More information about Artspace can be found at: http://www.artspace.org/

US - BID DOWNTOWN ARTIST SPACES PROGRAM (NEW ROCHELLE)

In New Rochelle, New York, the New Rochelle Business Improvement District (BID)

has a proposal for downtown property owners in a time when economics are uneasy:

convert vacant spaces that were previously intended for commercial use into studio

space for artists.


The idea behind the initiative is to not only provide long-term affordable studio

space to artists, but also to help property owners that possess vacant buildings due

to the stagnant market. In addition, the program would promote an increase of

pedestrian movement into the downtown area, which could help downtown

businesses, as well as return New Rochelle to its former artistic roots, which includes

the legacy of painter and illustrator Norman Rockwell.

Before the program was announced, Ralph DiBart, Executive Director of the

BID had identified about 25,000 square feet of unused upper-floor space in

downtown buildings suitable for this program. A month later, in March 2009, 6,000

square feet of that space had been rented to artists. The program estimated that

10,000 square feet of the total space would be rehabilitated through the end of 2009.

Although such spaces could have been rented for up to $24 USD per square foot

when used for commercial space, many of the buildings have been sitting vacant for

a few years due to the economic downturn and the conversion of the vacant space

into artist studios is far less costly than it would be to renovate for commercial

vendors. The artist studios are priced at rents of between $350 to $900 USD

depending on size and exposure to light, rather than by square foot because of an

agreement with the BID. For one newly signed lease, the price amounts to just under

$17 USD per square foot.

Funding for this program is provided by the New York State Housing Trust

Fund Corporation’s New York Main Street Program, which will match grants of up to

$30,000 USD per building, to a total of $90,000 USD for renovation costs.

DiBart has worked with the nearby City of Peakskill in 1990 during another

recession on a similar project and successfully created a Downtown Artist District.

He envisions that once the artists are in place, the BID will work with the artists to

help them promote their work and organize activities and events to bring the public

into downtown New Rochelle (New Rochelle Downtown Business Improvement

District, 2009; Charkes, 2009; Iarocci, 2009).

This project as it stands may not be applicable for Vancouver because the

prices for studio space are much more expensive than what other Vancouver studios

have been able to achieve. Also, the building stock for this type of renovation is

limited. Regardless, this type of idea has taken root in Vancouver through the work


of David Duprey and the Hastings Renaissance program, which were discussed in

the Vancouver case study. What this type of project risks, however, is prospective

gentrification to the neighbourhoods in which they take place, if the buildings are not

secured for artists for the long-term. What Vancouver could learn from the BID

example is the infrastructure provided by this association. It is important that artists

have a network to turn to for business advice, as well as to provide networking

opportunities.

The BID’s announcement of the Downtown Artist Spaces Program can be found at:

http://www.newrochelledowntown.com/articles/?article=106

The New Rochelle Downtown Business Improvement District (BID) is a non-

profit association created in 2000 with over 800 business and property owners as its

members. The BID is involved with the economic development, new business and

new investment in New Rochelle’s downtown. For more information about the BID,

visit: http://www.newrochelledowntown.com/

US - BOSTON ARTIST SPACE INITIATIVE (BOSTON)

The Boston City Council and the Massachusetts Legislature established the Boston

Redevelopment Authority (BRA) in 1957 to expand the responsibilities previously

held by the Boston Housing Authority beyond public housing. The City Planning

Board was also later consolidated into the BRA. The BRA’s development authorities

include the power to buy and sell property, the power to acquire property through

eminent domain, and the power to grant tax concessions to encourage commercial

and residential development (Boston Redevelopment Authority, 2010a).

The Boston Redevelopment Authority recognizes that space and real estate

concerns are a large issue for Boston artists and have launched the Boston Artist

Space Initiative in response to this need. As part of the Initiative, the BRA operates

quarterly reviews of artists’ credentials to certify that only artists occupy permanent


spaces specially created for them. Artists are required to demonstrate their recent

work to a committee of peers to qualify. Artists accepted will receive an Artist

Certificate and can seek out work- or live/work spaces specially designated by the

BRA through deed restrictions or other legally binding covenants. The Artist

Certificate is valid for five years, after which artists need to be re-certified (Artspace

Projects, Inc. and Boston Redevelopment Authority, 2003; Boston Redevelopment

Authority, 2010b).

The BRA supports the development of artist live/work and work-only space in

various buildings and Boston neighbourhoods. The units may be located in

condominiums, cooperatives or rental buildings. A variety of spaces ensure that the

needs of artists at varying income levels can be met. The BRA website provides

links to live/work and work-only units for rent and sale, as well as temporary

performance space for rent (Boston Redevelopment Authority; 2010c).

In addition to the certification process, the BRA has also secured certain

benefits for artist and artist spaces. According to the Boston Zoning Code, artists are

the only group allowed to live in industrial zones. The BRA has set up specific

design guidelines for artist spaces including minimum square feet for live/work units,

sound proofing and ventilation requirements as well as loading and elevator access

(Artspace Projects, Inc. and Boston Redevelopment Authority, 2003).

The BRA has also established an Artist Space Mailing List, which is a

database of over 3,000 artists in Boston that receive regular updates on available

units, first time homeowner workshops and other issues related to the Artist Space

Initiative, such as prospective projects (Ibid.; Boston Redevelopment Authority,

2010d).

The Boston Artist Space Initiative contributes a pertinent example of how

policy and zoning can be used to govern users of artist spaces through the Artist

Certification program and the Boston Zoning Code. These types of policy and zoning

practices should be examined to see how they could be modified for use in

Vancouver. The establishment of an Artist Space Mailing List also provides a useful

source of information for this issue. Currently, the City of Vancouver’s Cultural

Services department runs a mailing list on all department activities, but it does not

specifically focus on the issue of affordable studio space.


BRA & Artspace Projects, Inc. Artists’ Survey

In order to judge the success of these initiatives as well as to assess what kinds of

affordable studio space strategies should be implemented in Boston, the BRA

commissioned Artspace Projects, Inc. to conduct a survey. In late March and early

April of 2002, Artspace Projects mailed the survey to 9,500 artists and conducted

focus groups. The survey received responses from nearly 2,000 participants. The

survey included an introduction by Boston’s mayor Thomas M. Menino and touched

on four areas: 1) artists’ current living and working information; 2) preferences for

living and work spaces; 3) demographic information; and 4) the respondent’s

personal interest in several proposed projects (Artspace Projects, Inc. and Boston

Redevelopment Authority, 2003).

More information about the Artist Survey as well as a copy of the report can be found

online at:

http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/econdev/bostonartistsurveyreport.asp

For more information, visit:

Boston Redevelopment Authority: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/

BRA’s Artist Certification Process:

http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/econdev/ArtistCertificationGuidelines.a

sp

BRA’s Boston Artist Space Initiative:

http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/econdev/ArtistSpaceInitiative.asp

To join the City of Vancouver’s Cultural Services mailing list, visit:

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/lists/index.htm


LESSONS LEARNED

From the case studies, several themes resonate very clearly. It is apparent that the

one of the largest themes is for artists, arts professionals, non-profit organizations

and municipalities dealing with affordable studio space to use all available resources

at their disposal. Village Underground, Open Container V and the BID Downtown

Artist Spaces Program all used existing stock of Underground cars, shipping

containers and vacant buildings to produce affordable artist space. But resources

are not limited to purely physical elements. From the First Nations Cooperative who

drew from their own members’ good credit and business skills, to Artspace who

seeks funding from a variety of sources, these successful stories show that each

body employed whatever resources they could find to work towards their goals.

A second dominant theme is to create networks. To successfully negotiate the

case for Artscape Triangle Lofts, Artscape needed to partner with developer

Urbancorp, the association Active 18 and the City of Toronto. Both Village

Underground and the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s survey relied on the support

of the local mayors. Instead of seeking out networks itself, Artspace was asked by

the City of Saint Paul to renovate the Tilsner, demonstrating the power of its

established connections to pave the way for further and future artist space initiatives.

A third commonality between many of the cases is the need for flexibility for

various types of artists. Many of the examples demonstrated flexibility in studio

types, whether they are work/live, live/work or work-only studios. Studios also

ranged in pricing for a range of income levels and in size for different household

sizes. Involvement in organization decisions is also important to some artists that

wish to join co-operatives but less so for those that just need a space to work.

The next two lessons learned often go hand-in-hand. It is necessary to dream

big but also to be prepared for unexpected consequences. Village Underground and

Open Container V are both examples of stretching beyond conventional examples to

find new, innovative solutions for affordable studio space. The First Nations

Cooperative and Artscape also had strong ideas but needed to adapt them according

to the circumstances. The First Nations Cooperative originally wanted to create a

cooperative gallery to pool together resources, but ended up needing to create

separate entities because of the cooperative’s lack of assets. Artscape’s primary


goal was to mediate the situation between Urbancorp and Active 18, but ended up

becoming involved managing an artist studio project as a result.

Finally, the lesson of learning from other examples was important for the City

of Saint Paul who requested that Artspace renovate a second building. This lesson

was also important for the BID Downtown Artist Spaces Program in New Rochelle

that learned from the City of Peakskill’s experience. Hopefully Vancouver artists will

also be able to learn from the experience of other the cities demonstrated here and

incorporate elements of these working solutions and/or lessons to provide affordable

artist studios in their own city.


Recommendations

Although this handbook has been targeted for artists, this final section also includes

recommendations for other parties, so that interested artists can see what other

changes are feasible in the near future. Additionally, these are also

recommendations that artists could get involved with, whether it is by simply

providing constructive input or by taking on a larger role.

FOR ARTISTS/CO-OPERATIVES/NON-PROFITS:

In many of the examples studied in this report, artists were most effective at securing

affordable studio space when working in larger organizations or as part of a co-

operative. Therefore, it is encouraged that artists seek out like-minded people and

organizations to partner with. Joining with other artists will help the individuals to

further their common cause, but also provides opportunities for intra-learning within

the co-operative or organization about different art resources or business skills. By

joining together and then seeking a partner for their co-operative, the artists from 901

Artists Co-op found appropriate studio space after being evicted from their original

studios. They had some consulting help from Vancity, but also made their case

known in various newspapers and websites, which helped to publicize their cause.

Foxcroft from the example of Village Underground echoed this idea in his advice to

enlist the help of inspirational figures, which included the former mayor Ken

Livingstone. In the case of Vancouver, future artists may want to seek out other

artists from groups such as the Eastside Culture Crawl Society

(http://www.eastsideculturecrawl.com/) or Artwalk Vancouver

(http://artwalkvancouver.ca/). On a provincial level, artists can contact the Alliance

for Arts and Culture (http://www.allianceforarts.com/) and on a federal level, the

Creative City Network of Canada (http://www.creativecity.ca/). Seeking out strong-

willed individuals like David Duprey may also be helpful. Even if he does not have

space to let in one of his own buildings, he could perhaps refer an artist to useful

sources.

Funding is one of the largest issues in the way of affordable studio space.

However, some groups such as Artspace Projects Inc. and the First Nations Co-


operative have been able to create studio space by considering all funding sources

and schemes available. Artspace takes advantage of several different federal, state

and local funding sources in order to realize their projects. Similarly, the First

Nations Co-operative drew from personal loans, as well as funding from sources from

organizations that support First Nations work. If planning to renovate an existing

building, Vancouver co-operatives or non-profits can seek out funding sources such

as the City of Vancouver’s Heritage Façade Rehabilitation Program and Cultural

Infrastructure Grant Program. Artists are also encouraged to also seek out creative

solutions, such as the subway cars in Village Underground, or shipping containers in

Open Container V. For those who are ambitious, it may be of interest to work to form

a non-profit real estate developer like Artscape Projects, Inc. or a charity like Acme

Studios. Seeking out other arts organizations in Canada may also help artists to find

information or support for their cause. Concerning the financing of artist spaces,

Walker from the Urban Institute believes that “for long-term affordability, artists are

best off as renters in properties owned by nonprofits or as owners. For long-term

occupancy as artists, they are best off as occupants of cooperatives or of rental

projects owned by nonprofits dedicated to artists support” (Walker, 2007:14).

Although the City of Vancouver has demonstrated that it is also possible for a

municipal government to provide a few affordable artists’ studio spaces (CORE

studios, Artist Studio Award program), it may not necessarily be a sustainable or

feasible practice on a larger scale.

FOR THE CITY OF VANCOUVER:

Future studies and considerations

As set out in its Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan, it is important for the City of

Vancouver to move forward with the pilot project feasibility study of artist studios in

Vancouver. This study could incorporate an evaluation of the existing housing stock

in the Mount Pleasant, Strathcona, Downtown Eastside and Grandview-Woodlands

areas to clearly articulate potential locations for future artist studios. At the same

time, creative solutions should be researched like the use of shipping containers as

in Open Container V, or the use of laneway housing as artist studio space as the

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation has been investigating (Canada

Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2009). The cultural facility maps created in the


Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan are an essential resource to assist in developing

networks between the City, arts organizations and artists in Vancouver. The next

step could be to find an interactive method of displaying this information, such as on

a website, wiki or extension of VanMap (a web-based map system for Vancouver),

which would provide more detailed information about the exact location of cultural

facilities in Vancouver. Such a map would be easier to navigate and would ideally

have a search function where users could easily access a myriad of information

about cultural facilities. This could also be done by or in conjunction with other

entities in Vancouver that are interested in cultural facilities, but City support is

essential.

The City of Vancouver Cultural Services should also continue to work with

other departments of the City, such as Community Services, Real Estate Services

and the Planning Department. Not only can these partnerships help address gaps

and overlaps in their departments, but they can also reinforce each other’s goals.

Walker mentions that in the American context, “the inclusion of arts and cultural uses

in community development plans has much more practical value as a stimulant to

artists’ space development than inclusion of artists’ space development in cultural

plans” (Walker, 2007:18). Walker cites the reason is because community

development plans are based on the strength of existing community and economic

systems and require the support of locals. However, cultural plans can also be

effective if they are tied to community development plans or community development

goals. To successfully support affordable artist studios, Walker recommends that

cities support non-profit developers. In his experience, “the cities that have invested

heavily in creating supportive systems for non-profit developers also contain all of the

building blocks for effective support of artist space development” (Walker, 2007:18).

The Cultural Infrastructure Grant Program and the provision of cultural facilities to

non-profits at free or nominal rents by the City are important steps in this direction. In

addition to working with non-profit developers, partnerships with schools should be

encouraged. As seen in the Open Container V project, students often have creative

methods of problem solving. The topic of affordable studio space could easily be

incorporated into a course, design studio or competition for urban planning,

architecture, engineering, business or social studies students.


Working with various City departments or other bodies would also promote a

variety of housing types and structures. This is important as artists have various

needs and require market and non-market work/live, live/work and work-only studios

that range in both price and size. Larger non-profit organizations like Artspace

Projects, Inc. and Acme Studios acknowledge this point and include a diverse range

of artist spaces in their project portfolios.

Another consideration for the City would be the issue of artists crowding out

local residents, especially in the Strathcona and Downtown Eastside areas. The

STIR (rental) analysis conducted in this report showed that this could be an issue if

artist spaces take over existing housing stock or increase the rent of the area. The

City of Vancouver Community Services has acknowledged this fact in its Hastings

Renaissance program, which aims to renovate rather than re-construct spaces in an

attempt to keep rents low in the short-term. The Hastings Renaissance program also

focuses on buildings that are currently not in use, thereby increasing the housing

stock overall, so this does not necessarily displace locals at the moment. Over time,

however, this could lead to further gentrification in the area, raising rents and making

it unaffordable for local residents. To address this concern, the City should also look

into the development of affordable artist spaces in other areas of Vancouver besides

the Strathcona and Downtown Eastside areas for artists that do not need to work

near industrial land.

VanMap can be found at: http://vancouver.ca/vanMap/

Policy and Zoning opportunities

One of the toughest challenges in the establishment of affordable studio space for

artists is to ensure that they are in fact preserved for artists (at an affordable rate)

and that these artists are working in their studios. The Boston Redevelopment

Authority has addressed this issue by creating an Artist Certification program. The

City of Vancouver should research this program to see if it can be adopted for use in

Vancouver. Hand-in-hand with this certification program would be a change in

zoning to allow for an artist zoning in which only those with Artist Certificates could

live. Alternatively, artists could be the only use allowed in industrial zones, aside

from manufacturing activity, as Boston Zoning Code currently stipulates. A third


option would be to follow Artscape’s advice in extending the cultural zoning

designation beyond the downtown area so that artists would be permitted to live

under this designation in other parts of the city (Artscape, 2008). The combination of

the artist certification program, special zoning allowances and buildings in the hands

of non-profit organizations would help to guarantee these spaces are safeguarded for

artists in perpetuity.

Policies or bylaws would also need to be created or more clearly articulated to

somehow ensure that the artist studio is the artists’ primary residence so that

live/work studios do not become work-only studios. Similarly, a standardization of

“work” may need to be defined so that these spaces do not become live-only spaces.

The current live/work use guidelines do not stipulate these concerns, and rather

focus more on the external and structural details. In terms of structural form, the City

of Vancouver Community Services may want to stipulate guidelines concerning

ceiling heights or adequate soundproofing, which are both elements that do not

appear in the current live/work guidelines. A re-evaluation of the current artist studio

classes beyond the present two categories (Class A and B) could help to establish a

greater variety of spaces to meet the need of Vancouver’s artists.

Another recommendation in the City’s Cultural Facility Study was to consider

creating zoning bylaws to allow various artists’ uses such as gallery and retail space

to co-exist with live/work studio spaces (Artscape, 2008). This would promote the

recommendations championed also by Sacco et al. to combine multiple artist uses in

the same space.

Once the new policies and bylaws have been set in place, a post-occupancy

review of spaces designated as artists’ studios may be necessary to ensure that

these units are really used by artists for the production of art.

Current City of Vancouver live/work use guidelines can be found online at:

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20060321/documents/motiona2.pdf)

FOR OTHER INTERESTED THIRD PARTIES:

Other interested parties could help artists find affordable studio space by continuing

to research community economic development models, as Vancity has been doing,


because funding sources is an important issue that needs to be addressed,

particularly in the Vancouver case. Ensuring that affordable artist studios can be

economically productive will convince developers that these kinds of initiatives are

worthwhile investments.

A second suggestion would be for third parties to centralize resources related

to this issue. In the author’s own personal experience searching for information

about artist spaces in Vancouver has been difficult as it is very fragmented. Elvy Del

Bianco agrees (personal communication, March 10, 2010). It would be ideal if a list

of artists and artist spaces could be compiled and translated into a document or

website for artists, non-profits, City staff and other interested parties to access. An

example of this is Artists’ Assets, which is a professional resource guide for artists in

Washington State. Artist Trust, a non-profit organization based in Washington,

assembles this guide with the support of several governmental and non-

governmental organizations. Some of the artist resources that Artists’ Assets

provides are: business and professional resources, legal information, funding

opportunities, workspace and housing information as well as resources for specific

artist genres, among other topics (Artist Trust, 2008). An example of artists’

resources in website form is ArtistLink. ArtistLink is the initiative of the Boston

Redevelopment Authority in conjunction with several other Massachusetts

organizations. The website serves Massachusetts artists by providing tools for

artists, developers and municipalities, in addition to a function called

artspacefinder™, which allows registered users to both find and list available artist

spaces (ArtistLink, 2010). Locally, the “DTES Arts and Culture Resource Map”

arranged by North Sky Consulting Ltd. (2006) begins to address this issue but a

more comprehensive document detailing artist information for all of Vancouver is

necessary to encourage collaboration between different parties interested in arts

promotion. This resource guide also lacks information about funding sources or legal

services. In addition, a document such as this is fixed in time and cannot be as

easily updated and disseminated as a website. Those parties interested in cultural

mapping beyond databases and simple websites, such as the utilization of social

media and smartphone applications, should turn to David T. Brown’s contribution

entitled “A Wish List for Cultural Resource Mapping” in Greg Baeker’s Rediscovering

the Wealth of Places.


The artist resources mentioned in this section can be found at:

Artists’ Assets:

https://www.artisttrust.org/sites/trust.civicactions.net/files/08ArtistsAssets.pdf

Artist Link:

http://www.artistlink.org/

DTES Arts and Culture Resource Map: http://www.vancouveragreement.ca/wp-

content/uploads/DTESArtsCultureResourceMap2006.pdf

ON PARTNERSHIPS

Above all, it is important for those interested in artists’ issues to pursue partnerships

with other individuals and organizations that share these interests. Through their

local field research of the arts in Vancouver, Sacco and his colleagues have

determined that “there is a serious lack of mutual knowledge and coordination

between different cultural institutions, and this impedes the emergence of a shared

cultural identity of the city” (Sacco et al, 2007:39). The Cultural Facilities Priorities

Plan also mentions that partnership is one of three key roles of Cultural Services, in

addition to acting as a provider and facilitator (Artscape, 2008). “Connecting People,

Ideas and Communities” (Ibid: 7) is also one of the five strategic themes used as

directions for the Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan.

Once again, it should be mentioned that partnerships between compatible arts

uses should look into sharing common space, and that partnerships between

different individuals and bodies interested in the arts should be encouraged.

Partnerships with schools would bring out innovative examples like Open Container

V and the joining of local residents with students as in the case of the Woodward’s

building’s W2 and SFU. Vancouver artists could also work on an international scale

with organizations like Acme Studios to develop international opportunities for local

artists and to increase the international recognition of local artists. When the artists

return to their hometowns, they would bring with them the knowledge of the other

organization’s techniques to securing affordable studio space, which could be

disseminated and put into action in a locally applicable way. Currently, Acme Studios


accepts international residents from six countries in its live/work studios, but the only

Canadian organization that has partnered with them so far is a Quebec-based group

(Acme Studios, 2010e).

Finally, partnerships between different groups could aim to form national

initiatives that would strengthen support for artist studios in Canada as well as in

Vancouver. Acme Studios did this by establishing the National Federation of Artists’

Studio Providers in the United Kingdom (Acme Studios, 2010b). National networks

could also help to create advocacy programs for affordable studio providers such as

Capital Studios in London (Acme Studios, 2010f). Partnerships are critical in

Vancouver and Sacco et al. agree that “a more strategically focused policy for BC's

creative industries would be likely to unleash a development potential that is still

mostly lying underground” (Sacco et al., 2007).


Conclusion

This project aimed to outline the current status of affordable studio space in

Vancouver and seek out possible methods of affordable studio space provision from

other case studies. In this study, one of the largest barriers to affordable studio

space has been identified as a current lack of capacity to deal with these issues.

However, this is one area that the City of Vancouver’s Cultural Services is working on

developing in its Phase I Implementation of the Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan.

Organizations such as Vancity and B.O.B. are also working to develop local capacity

through research and monetary investment in local artist initiatives. Another barrier

that has been identified in Vancouver is funding, which is particularly important

because of the unaffordability of space in general in the city. Changes to policy and

bylaws can help to improve the current system of affordable studio space, but it is

important that the capacity and funding issues are first addressed. The City has

begun to respond to the issue of funding, especially with the newly introduced

Cultural Infrastructure Grant Program. Further progress in cultural infrastructure will

depend on additional co-operation and funding from other levels of government.

The case studies cited in this project provide some ideas as to how Vancouver

can move forward on this issue, but they are of course, subject to modification based

on the local context. This handbook has aimed to understand the case studies on a

basic level as well as which elements are useful for Vancouver. However, further

research could focus in on particular case examples to better understand how they

can be applied and implemented in Vancouver.

This handbook also provided some background information into the question

of why studio space in Vancouver is unaffordable, but could have been strengthened

by additional strategies to combat this issue. From this study, it has been found that

to make studios more affordable, they must be owned by a non-profit or a landlord

dedicated to arts and cultural uses. When the capacity in Vancouver is further built

up, perhaps more solutions will emerge to address the issue of affordability.

A limitation of this study is that it is only a partial assessment of the

conversation on affordable studio space in Vancouver. As mentioned in the project


scope, this study does not take into account informal studio spaces, which are a very

important component to the arts and culture sector in Vancouver. This study has

also only involved a small percentage of artists and organizations involved with arts

and culture. Many more perspectives must also be considered to understand more

completely the issue of affordable artist studio space in Vancouver. However, this

handbook has been constructed in such a way that it provides a starting point for

artists interested in this issue. Further inquiry into the references provided would

help to enhance the larger picture, and will hopefully incite the reader to conduct his

or her own additional research into this issue or sub-issues of interest.


Bibliography

Acme Studios. (2010a). Affordable Artists’ Studios to Rent. Acme Studios. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.acme.org.uk/studios.php

Acme Studios. (2010b). About Acme. Acme Studios. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.acme.org.uk/about.php

Acme Studios. (2010c). Affordable artists’ studios in London. Acme Studios. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.acme.org.uk/

Acme Studios. (2010d). Residencies, Awards & Community Programme. Acme Studios. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.acme.org.uk/residencies.php

Acme Studios. (2010e). International Residencies Programme. Acme Studios. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.acme.org.uk/international.php

Acme Studios. (2010f). London Advocacy. Acme Studios. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.acme.org.uk/capital.php

Alliance for Arts and Culture. (2009a). The Case for Restoring Arts Funding in British Columbia. Alliance for Arts and Culture. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from: http://allianceforarts.com/public_html/pdf/presentation_document.pdf

Alliance for Arts and Culture. (2009b). Progress Lab 1422: New Cultural Hub Opens on Vancouver’s East Side. Alliance for Arts and Culture. Retrieved March 10, 2010 from: http://www.allianceforarts.com/blog/progress-lab-1422-new-cultural-hub-opens-vancouver’s-east-side

Amler, B., Betke, D., Eger, H., Ehrich, C., Kohler, A., Kutter, A.,…, Zimmermann,

W.(1999). Land Use Planning Methods, Strategies and Tools. Deutsche Geselschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit GmbH. Integrated Approaches to Participatory Development. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from: http://www.iapad.org/publications/ppgis/gtz_plup.pdf

ArtistLink. (2010). ArtistLink: Connecting Artists and Space in Massachusetts.

ArtistLink. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from: http://www.artistlink.org/Artist Trust. (2008). Artists’ Assets: a professional resource guide for artists. Artist

Trust. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from: https://www.artisttrust.org/sites/trust.civicactions.net/files/08ArtistsAssets.pdf

Artscape. (2007). Artscape Helps Broker Triple-Win Deal in Queen West Triangle. Artscape. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.torontoartscape.on.ca/news/artscape-helps-broker-triple-win-deal-queen-west-triangle

Artscape. (2008). City of Vancouver Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan – Final Report.


City of Vancouver. Retrieved December 1, 2009, from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/culturalservices/CulturalFacilities.pdf

Artscape. (2009). FAQs. Artscape Triangle Lofts. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from:

http://www.artscapetrianglelofts.ca/faqs#Who_is_eligible_to_own_or_rent_at_Artsca

Artspace Projects Inc. (2009a). Tilsner Artists’ Cooperative. Artspace. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.artspace.org/properties/tilsner/

Artspace Projects Inc. (2009b). Frequently Asked Questions. Artspace. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.artspace.org/about/faq.html

Artspace Projects, Inc. & Boston Redevelopment Authority. (2003). Keeping Boston’s Creative Capital: A survey of artist space needs. Boston Redevelopment Authority. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/pdf/documents/boston_artist_survey_report.pdf

Assembly of BC Arts Councils. (2010). New Provincial Budget Continues to Reduce Spending on Arts and Culture. Assembly of BC Arts Councils – News/Jobs. Retrieved April 5, 2010 from: http://www.assemblybcartscouncils.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=419:new-provincial-bidget-continues-to-reduce-spending-on-arts-and-culture&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=199

Barnes, T. & T. Hutton. (2009). Situating the New Economy: Contingencies of Regeneration and Dislocation in Vancouver’s Inner City. Urban Studies 46(5&6), pp. 1247-1269

Berger-Vachon, C. (1992). Ateliers: Artists’ Studios. Paris: City of Paris/Mairie de Paris

Bianchini, F. & L. Ghilardi. (1997). Culture and Neighbourhoods: A Comparative Report. Strasbourg: Council of Europe

Boston Redevelopment Authority. (2010a). About the BRA. Boston Redevelopment Authority. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/HomePageUtils/about_us.asp

Boston Redevelopment Authority. (2010b). Artist Certification Guidelines and Application – rolling deadline. Boston Redevelopment Authority. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/econdev/rolling_guidelines.pdf

Boston Redevelopment Authority. (2010c). Opportunities for Artist Space in Boston. Boston Redevelopment Authority. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/econdev/OpportunitiesforArtistSpace.asp

Boston Redevelopment Authority. (2010d). BRA Artist Space Mailing List. Boston Redevelopment Authority. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/econdev/ArtistSpaceMailing.asp


Brown, D. (2010). A Wish List for Cultural Resource Mapping. In G. Baeker (Ed.), Rediscovering the Wealth of Places: a municipal cultural planning handbook for Canadian communities. (pp. 101-116). St. Thomas, ON: Municipal World Inc.

Bryan, J., D. Clarke, HUS, M. Munday & A. Roberts. (1998). The Economic Impact of the Arts and Cultural Industries in Wales. Cardiff: Welsh Economy Research Unit

Burtenshaw, D., M. Bateman, G. Ashworth. (1991). The European City: A Western Perspective. London: David Fulton

Byers, J. (2007). City, builder reach artful compromise. The Star. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/272113

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2009). Livable Lanes: A Study of Laneway Infill Housing in Vancouver and Other Growing B.C. Communities. CMHC Research Highlight. Socio-economic Series 09-020. Retrieved March 15, 2010 from: http://www.cmhc.ca/odpub/pdf/66642.pdf

Carpenter, J. & L. Lees. (2009). Gentrification in New York, London and Paris: An International Comparison. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 19(2) : pp. 286-303

Casey, B., R. Dunlop, S. Selwood. (1996). Culture as a Commodity: The Economics of the Arts and Built Heritage in the UK. London: Policy Studies Institute

Castells, M. (1989). The Informational City: Information Technology, Economic Restructuring and the Urban-Regional Process. Oxford: Blackwells

Charkes, J. (2009). New Rochelle Hopes to Draw Artists to Affordable Space. The New York Times. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/nyregion/westchester/15artistswe.html

City of Vancouver. (1991). Central Area Plan: Goals and Land Use Policy. City of Vancouver Land Use and Development Policies and Guidelines. Retrieved March 18, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/C011.pdf

City of Vancouver. (1996). Zoning and Guidelines – Artist ‘Live/Work’ Studios, Cultural Facilities and Brewery Creek. City of Vancouver - Policy Report: Urban Structure. Retrieved April 5, 2010. From: http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/960418/pe2.htm

City of Vancouver. (2002a). Density Bonus. Community Services – Planning: Current

Planning. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/COMMSVCS/PLANNING/heritage/casestudies/CS_Dens.htm

City of Vancouver. (2002b). Transfer of Density Policy and Procedure. City of

Vancouver – Land Use and Development Policies and Guidelines. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/Guidelines/T001.pdf

City of Vancouver. (2002c). Cultural Activities and Special Events. City of Vancouver, Community Services, Social Planning – Newcomer’s Guide to


Vancouver. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/COMMSVCS/SOCIALPLANNING/newtovancouver/part3/cultural.htm

City of Vancouver. (2005). Information about your Community. City of Vancouver Community WEBpages. Retrieved March 18, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/community_profiles/communityList.htm

City of Vancouver. (2006a). Live-work Use Guidelines. City of Vancouver Community Services – Land Use and Development Policies and Guidelines. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20060321/documents/motiona2.pdf

City of Vancouver. (2006b). Community Amenity Contributions – Through Rezonings.

City of Vancouver – Land Use and Development Policies and Guidelines. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/C025.pdf

City of Vancouver. (2009a). Great Beginnings: Old Streets, New Pride – June 2009

Project Progress Report. City of Vancouver, Great Beginnings. Retrieved March 12, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/greatbeginnings/pdf/09MidProgressRrt.pdf

City of Vancouver. (2009b). The Great Beginnings Program: Old Streets, New Pride

– 2009 Year End Progress Report. City of Vancouver, Great Beginnings. Retrieved March 12, 2010 from: ftp://webftp.vancouver.ca/webmisc/greatbeginning/2009report.pdf

City of Vancouver. (2009c). Creative City Task Force. City of Vancouver Cultural

Policy, Planning & Research. Retrieved March 20, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/policy/plan/creativecity/

City of Vancouver. (2010). Artist Studio Award Program. City of Vancouver – Cultural

Grants, Awards & Support Programs. City of Vancouver. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/gasp/awards/artiststudio/tour.htm

City of Vancouver Community Services. (2005a). Housing Plan for the Downtown Eastside. City of Vancouver Housing Centre. Retrieved March 14, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/housing/pdf/dteshousingplan.pdf

City of Vancouver Community Services (2005b). Heritage Façade Rehabilitation

Program Policies and Procedures for Gastown, Chinatown, Hastings Street Corridor and Victory Square. City of Vancouver Land Use and Development Policies and Guidelines. Retrieved March 12, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/H010.pdf

City of Vancouver Community Services (2009). City of Vancouver Statistics (2006 Census Data) – Local Area Statistics. Community Services Planning Department. Retrieved March 12, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/census/2006/localareas/index.htm


City of Vancouver Cultural Services. (2009a). Cultural Infrastructure and Facilities in Vancouver. City of Vancouver Cultural Services - Cultural Facilities. Retrieved March 12, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/facilities/index.htm

City of Vancouver Cultural Services. (2009b). Cultural Infrastructure Grant Program. City of Vancouver Cultural Services - Cultural Facilities. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/cultural/gasp/grants/facilities/eligibility.htm

Coriolis Consulting Corp. (2007). Obtaining Amenity Contributions from New Urban Development Projects: Discussion Paper for the City of Victoria, BC. The City of Victoria – City Hall. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from: http://www.victoria.ca/cityhall/pdfs/plnpln_downtown_amnty_cntrbt.pdf

Cox, W. (2010). 6th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey. Frontier Centre for Public Policy. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from: http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/3153

Creative City Task Force. (2008). Culture Plan for Vancouver 2008-2018. City of Vancouver. Retrieved March 18, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/creativecity/pdf/CulturePlan2008_%202018.pdf

DCMS. (1998). Creative Industries Mapping Document. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

DeMarco, C.. (2008). Regional Planning in Metro Vancouver: Advancing Social, Economic and Environmental Goals. Austin Chamber of Commerce. Retrieved March 16, 2010 from: http://www.austinchamber.com/TheChamber/AboutTheChamber/Vancouver08_Intercity/10-6_DeMarco.pdf

Durham, N. (2008). A new perch for unwanted subway cars. CBC News. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/11/11/f-rfa-durham.html

Eastside Culture Crawl Society. (2009). Eastside Culture Crawl Map 2009. Retrieved November 30, 2010 from: http://www.eastsideculturecrawl.com/sites/default/files/ECC_Map_2009.pdf

Evans, G. (2001). Cultural Planning: An urban renaissance? London: Routledge

Ference Weicker & Company (2008). Evaluation of the City of Vancouver’s Cultural Grant Program. City of Vancouver Community Services. Retrieved March 15, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/culturalservices/CulturalGrants.pdf

Gallant, P. (2010). Creating affordable housing out of thin air. Yonge Street. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.yongestreetmedia.ca/features/artscapetriangle0127.aspx

Ghilardi, L. (2001). Annex 1.1 - Cultural Planning and Cultural Diversity. In T. Bennett (ed.). Differing Diversities: Cultural Policy and Cultural Diversity. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe Publications


Gijssen, J. (2008). Culture Plan Implementation – Phase I of the 2008 – 2023 Cultural Facilities Priorities Plan (Report 4 of 5). City of Vancouver Policy Report: Culture. Retrieved March 13, 2010, from: http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20080626/documents/csb5.pdf

Glass, R. (1964). Introduction, in: R. Glass (Ed.) Aspects of Change, pp. xiii-xlii. London: MacGibbon & Kee

Grogan, D., C. Mercer & D. Engwicht. (1995) The Cultural Planning Handbook: An Essential Australian Guide. St Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin

Hall, P. (1997). Modelling the Post-industrial city. Futures. 29(4/5). Pp. 311-322

Heilbrun, J. & C. Gray. (1993). The Economics of Art and Culture: An American Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Hill, K. (2009). Artists in Large Canadian Cities Based on the 2006 Census. Statistical insights on the arts, 8(1). Retrieved March 12, 2010 from: http://www.hillstrategies.com/docs/Artists_large_cities2006.pdf

Hutton, T. (2004). Post-industrialism, Post-modernism and the Reproduction of Vancouver’s Central Area: Retheorising the 21st-century City. Urban Studies. 41(10), pp. 1953-1982

Iarocci, M. (2009). New Rochelle takes artful approach. Westchester County Business Journal. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.westfaironline.com/component/zine/article/6492-new-rochelle-takes-artful-approach-.html

Jarvis, H. & Pratt, A. (2006). Bringing it all back home: The extensification and ‘overflowing’ of work: The case of San Francisco’s new media households. Geoforum. 37(3), pp. 331-339

Jessup, J. (2000). Lease Terms for the Core Artists Live/Work Co-op at 275 Alexander Street. City of Vancouver Administrative Report. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from: http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/000201/a2.htm

Kain, J. F. , Apgar, W. C. Jr. 1985. Housing and Neighborhood Dynamics: A Simulation Study. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Press

Kettmann, M. (2007). Beware the Box. Santa Barbara Independent. Retrieved

March 1, 2010, from: http://www.independent.com/news/2007/nov/06/beware-box/

kimyasuda. (2007). OpenContainer V: BoxStudios. Flickr. Retrieved March 21,

2010, from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/10135826@N08/930987006/in/set-72157601061319974/

Kloosterman, R. & T. Elfring. (1991). Werken in Nederland. Schoonhoven: Academic Service

Kotowski, B. & M. Frohling. (1993). No Art, No City. Atelier-Gesellscahft, Kulturwerkl des Berufsverbandes Bildender Kunstler. Berlin: BBK


Kunzmann, K. R. (2004). Culture, creativity and spatial planning. Town Planning Review, 75(4), pp. 383-404

Landry, C. (2005). Lineages of the Creative City, in: Franke, S. & E. Verhagen (Eds.)

Creativity and the City: How the creative economy changes the city, pp. 42-55. Amsterdam: NAi Publishers.

Lazaruk, S. (2010, January 25). Vancouver’s housing least affordable to its own

citizens, survey says. The Province. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from: http://www.theprovince.com/news/fraser-valley/Vancouver+housing+least+affordable+citizens+survey+says/2482583/story.html

LeGates, R. T., Hartman , C. 1986. The anatomy of displacement in the United States, in Smith, N. & P. Williams (Eds.). Gentrification of the City, pp. 178-200. Boston: Allen & Unwin

London Rebuilding Society. (2006a). Village Underground. London Rebuilding

Society. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.londonrebuilding.com/information/89713/90262/90554/90536/village_underground/

London Rebuilding Society. (2006b). About Us. London Rebuilding Society. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.londonrebuilding.com/information/89713/about_us/

MacDonald, C. (2001). First Nations Artists Co-operative. The Co-operative Learning Centre. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.learningcentre.coop/resource/first-nations-artists-co-operative

Macdonald, A. & S. Chai. (2007). The Effects of Gentrification on Artists in Two Vancouver Neighbourhoods. Western Geography. 17/18/19, pp. 61-77

Mays, J. (2007, March 17). The next step in remaking Queen West. The Globe and

Mail, p. G2.

McNulty, R. (1992). Culture and Communities: The Arts in the Life of American Cities. Washington, DC: Partners for Livable Communities

Meggs, G. (2009). Last days for Crawl’s 901 Main? Geoff Meggs, Vancouver City Councillor. Category – The Arts. Retrieved March 10, 2010 from: http://www.geoffmeggs.ca/category/arts/

Mercer, C. (1991) What Is Cultural Planning?. Paper presented to the Community Arts Network National Conference. Sydney, 10 October, 1991.

Mercer, C. (2006). Cultural Planning for Urban Development and Creative Cities. Cultural Identity, Cultural Mapping and Planning in the Øresund region. Retrieved March 19, 2010, from : http://www.culturalplanning-oresund.net/PDF_activities/maj06/Shanghai_cultural_planning_paper.pdf


Morton, B. (2010, January 26). Vancouver’s home prices rated ‘most unaffordable’. The Vancouver Sun. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Vancouver+severely+unaffordable+study/2482683/story.html

Myerscough, J. (1988). The Economic Importance of the Arts in Britain. London: Policy Studies Institute

New Rochelle Downtown Business Improvement District. (2009). New Rochelle BID announces “Downtown Artist Spaces Program”. New Rochelle Downtown Business Improvement District. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.newrochelledowntown.com/articles/?article=106

North Sky Consulting Ltd. (2006). DTES Arts and Culture Resource Map. Vancouver Agreement. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from: http://www.vancouveragreement.ca/wp-content/uploads/DTESArtsCultureResourceMap2006.pdf

North Sky Consulting Ltd. (2007). Arts & Culture Strategic Framework & Investment Plan – Downtown Eastside Environmental Scan. Vancouver Agreement. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from: http://www.vancouveragreement.ca/wp-content/uploads/ArtsCulture-EnviroScan2007.pdf

Parker, C. & A. Pascual. (2002). Chapter 4 - A voice that could not be ignored: community GIS and gentrification battles in San Francisco. In W. Craig, T. Harris & D.Weiner (Eds.), Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems. (pp. 55-64). London: Taylor & Francis

Penner, D. (2010, April 1). Average price of Metro Vancouver home now almost

$663,000, above pre-recession levels. The Vancouver Sun. Retrieved April 5, 2010 from:http://www.vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/Average+price+Metro+Vancouver+home+almost+above+recession+levels/2751240/story.html

Perdeaux, M. (2008). Village Underground. Flickr. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/perdeaux/2875155199/

Regional Analytics Inc. (2002). A Preliminary Investigation into the Economic Impact of Brownfield Redevelopment Activities in Canada. Canadian Urban Institute. Retrieved March 17, 2010, from: http://www.canurb.com/media/pdf/NRTEE_Post_Copy.pdf

Roodhouse, S. (2006). Cultural Qu4rters: Principles and Practices. Bristol: Intellect

Books Sacco, P., B. Williams & E. Del Bianco. (2007). The Power of the Arts in Vancouver:

Creating a Great City. The Holm Team. Retrieved December 1, 2009 from: http://www.theholmteam.ca/votewendy/media/PowerOfTheArts.pdf

sashafatcat. (2008). 08-oct-07. Flickr. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sashafatcat/2986125440/


Smith, R. & K. Warfield. (2007). The Creative City: a matter of values. The University of Toronto : Innovation Systems Research Network. Retrieved December 1, 2009 from: http://www.utoronto.ca/isrn/publications/WorkingPapers/Working07/Smith07_CreativeCity.pdf

Statistics Canada & Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2008). Research Highlight: The Dynamics of Housing Affordability, Socio-economic Series 08-002. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Retrieved March 12, 2010 from: https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/catalog/productDetail.cfm?csid=1&cat=143&itm=13&lang=en&fr=1268427214765

Stewart, M.. (2006). Vancouver tackles industrial land shortfall. Business Edge News Magazine. 3(14). Retrieved March 16, 2010 from: http://www.businessedge.ca/archives/article.cfm/vancouver-tackles-industrial-land-shortfall-13012

Stothers, J. (2009). A fresh take on developing the Downtown Eastside. CTV News – British Columbia. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from : http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090403/BC_100_block_Hastings_20090403/20090404/?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

Tilsner Artists’ Cooperative. (2003). About the Tilsner. Tilsner Artists’ Cooperative. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://tilsner.net/news/29.shtml

Trouton, L. (2009). W2, Two Ventricles of the Heart: Main Street and the Downtown Eastside, Vancouver. Artistrun ArtConverge. Retrieved March 10, 2010 from: http://artistrun.org/2009/05/08/w2-downtown-eastside/

United Nations. (1995). Our Creative Diversity. United Nations World Commission on Culture and Development. Paris: UNESCO Publishing

Vancouver Courier. (2008). Curtain rises on artists’ co-op. Canada.com. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from: http://www.canada.com/vancouvercourier/news/story.html?id=46fd60b1-fadd-495c-b854-16876e61c8ff

VIVO Media Arts Centre. (2009). About VIVO Media Arts Centre. VIVO Media Arts.

Retrieved March 13, 2010 from: http://videoinstudios.com/aboutus.php

W2 Community Media Arts. (2010a). W2 Mandate and Vision. W2 Community Media Arts. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from: http://www.creativetechnology.org/overview/page/show?id=2128459%3APage%3A3531

W2 Community Media Arts. (2010b). W2 Space. W2 Community Media Arts. Retrieved March 13, 2010 from: http://www.creativetechnology.org/layout/page/show?id=2128459%3APage%3A3530

Walker, C. (2007). Artist Space Development: Financing. Maryland State Arts


Council. Retrieved December 1, 2009, from: http://www.msac.org/docs_uploaded/ArtistSpaceDevelopmentFinancing.pdf

Weldon, C. (2009). Request for a Capital Loan Guarantee for Artscape Triangle Lofts

at 150 Sudbury Street. City of Toronto. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2009/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-22536.pdf

Werb, J. (2009, August 27). Vancouver artists struggle with studio space. The Georgia Straight. Retrieved February 5, 2010, from: http://www.straight.com/article-249265/struggling-studio-crisis

Woolley, P. (2007, November 15). Eastside Culture Crawl artists on the endangered

list. The Georgia Straight. Retrieved December 1, 2009, from: http://www.straight.com/article-118409/eastside-culture-crawl-artists-on-the-endangered-list

Wyman, M. (2004). The Defiant Imagination: Why Culture Matters. Douglas &

McIntyre Ltd.: Vancouver Yasada, K. (2007a). Open Container I – V. The Container Project. Retrieved March

1, 2010, from: http://www.ucira.ucsb.edu/ContainerProjects/Opencontainer.html

Yasada, K. (2007b). The Container Project. The Container Project. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from: http://www.ucira.ucsb.edu/ContainerProjects/index.html

Zukin, S. (1982). Loft Living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press

Zukin, S. (1987). Gentrification: Culture and Capital in the Urban Core. Annual

Review of Sociology. 13, pp. 129-147


Appendix A Descriptions of the nine arts occupations Source: Hill, 2009 and 2006 National Occupation Classification for Statistics (NOC-S), Statistics Canada: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/subjects-sujets/standard-norme/soc-cnp/2006/noc2006-cnp2006-eng.htm

Occupation Title and Code

Definition

Authors and writers (F021)

Authors and writers plan, research and write books, scripts, storyboards, plays, essays, speeches, manuals, specifications and other non-journalistic articles for publication or presentation. They are employed by advertising agencies, governments, large corporations, private consulting firms, publishing firms, multimedia/new-media companies and other establishments, or they may be self-employed. Exclusions: Journalists (F023, Journalists).

Producers, directors, choreographers and related occupations (F031)

This unit group includes producers, directors, choreographers and others who oversee and control the technical and artistic aspects of film, television, radio, dance and theatre productions. They are employed by film production companies, radio and television stations, broadcast departments, advertising companies, sound recording studios, record production companies and dance companies. They may also be self-employed. Exclusions: Editors of pre-recorded videos, sound recording mixers and other radio and video technicians (F125, Audio and Video Recording Technicians).

Conductors, composers and arrangers (F032)

This unit group included those who conduct bands and orchestras, compose musical works and arrange instrumental and vocal compositions. They are employed by symphony and chamber orchestras, bands, choirs, sound recording companies, orchestras for ballet and opera performances or they may be self-employed. Exclusions: Occupations concerned with performing or teaching instrumental or vocal music (F033, Musicians and Singers).

Musicians and singers (F033)

This unit group includes musicians, singers and teachers of vocal and instrumental music. Musicians and singers perform with orchestras, choirs, opera companies and popular bands in establishments such as concert halls, lounges and theatres and in film, television and recording studios. Music teachers teach in conservatories, academies and private homes. Exclusions: Persons who teach music in post-secondary, secondary or elementary school (E1, Teachers and Professors), and Music composers and arrangers (F032, Conductors, Composers and Arrangers).


Dancers (F034)

This unit group includes dancers and dance teachers. Dancers are employed by ballet and dance companies, television and film productions and night clubs and similar establishments. Dance teachers are employed by dance academies and dance schools. Exclusions: Persons who teach dance in post-secondary, secondary or elementary schools (E1, Teachers and Professors), Choreographers (F031, Producers, Directors, Choreographers and Related Occupations); and Exotic and striptease dancers (F132, Other Performers).

Actors and comedians (F035)

Actors and comedians perform roles in motion picture, television, theatre and radio productions to entertain a variety of audience. They are employed by motion picture, television, theatre and other production companies. This unit group includes acting teachers employed by private acting schools. Exclusions: Persons who teach acting in post-secondary, secondary or elementary schools (E1, Teachers and Professors).

Painters, sculptors and other visual artists (F036)

Painters, sculptors and other visual artists create original paintings, drawings, sculptures, engravings and other artistic works. They are usually self-employed. This group also includes art instructors and teachers, who are usually employed by art schools. Exclusions: Art teachers in primary, secondary or post-secondary institutions (E1, Teachers and Professors); Graphic designers (F141, Graphic Designers and Illustrating Artists); Skilled craftspersons (F144, Artisans and Craftspersons) and House painters (H144, Painters and Decorators).

Other performers (F132)

This unit group includes circus performers, magicians, models, puppeteers and other performers not elsewhere classified. They are employed by circuses, nightclubs, theatre, advertising and other production companies or may be self-employed.

Artisans and craftspersons (F144)

This unit group includes those who use manual and artistic skills to design and make ornamental objects, pottery, stained glass, jewellery, rugs, blankets, other handicrafts and artistic floral arrangements. Makers of stringed musical instruments are also included in this unit group. Most craftspersons are self-employed. Artistic floral arrangers are usually employed in florist shops and floral departments of retail establishments or may be self-employed. Craft instructors are also included in this unit group and are employed by artisan guilds, colleges, private studios and recreational organizations. Exclusions: Painters, sculptors and other visual artists (F036, Painters, Sculptors and Other Visual Artists); Machine operators and assemblers and Related Occupations; or J, Occupations Unique to Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities).

a handbook for vancouver artists seeking affordable studio

Documents