The Dallas Arts District: A case of radical founding

Posted At : November 19, 2011 11:34 PM | Posted By : vgrieves
Related Categories: Contemporary Issue

It’s pretty amazing how concepts that we discuss in class seem to pop up all over the place; I stumbled across this example of radical founding while casually “surfing the net” this afternoon. (Full article:http://moreintelligentlife.com/content/arts/a-job-frank-gehry).

The Dallas Arts District is a dramatic urban renewal project that has been in the works for over 30 years. The district now stands as a 19-block cultural arts center consisting of various museums and music halls (designed by “starchitects” such as Renzo Piano, Norman Foster, and Rem Koolhaas) where a run-down neighborhood once existed. It might sound great, but the problem is that the area lacks features of a vibrant neighborhood that Jane Jacobs noted as being so important: it’s not high density and it lacks diversity. As stated in the article, “Some locals complain that [the buildings] are clearly built for folks who drive in for a bit of culture and then drive away.”

As we’ve discussed in class, there are better and worse ways to found a place. Are the developers at fault for re-founding this derelict neighborhood as a glitzy tourist destination (that seems to be somewhat undesired by the people that live there)? Keep in mind that this top-down model has actually worked in some cities, such as the creation of DC’s Penn Quarter and the Minneapolis Mill District.

I also wonder: is the Dallas Arts District better than what existed before? Are impoverished neighborhoods somehow critical to maintain the gritty or authentic character of a city? Should they simply be eradicated, as in Dallas? What might be a better way to manage “problem” neighborhoods within a city?

Comments (2) |

Print |

Send |

del.icio.us |

Digg It! |

Linking Blogs | 32 Views

Comments (Comment Moderation is enabled. Your comment will not appear until approved.)

[Add Comment]

Upon watching the PBS clip about attempts being made by Detroit’s mayor to revitalize the city by condensing its boundaries, I agree with Tory’s suggestion that eradicating Dallas’ derelict neighborhoods could have been more beneficial to the city than attempting to rehabilitate those neighborhoods. The article notes the city’s lack of urban density. Without any natural boundaries to contain its growth, such as New York has being surrounded by water, the city is free to spread outwards. Currently, Dallas is 385 square miles and contains 1.2 million people. In contrast, Manhattan is 23 square miles and contains 1.6 million people. With evident problems of density, the action taken by city planners to develop an arts center in the location they chose was not the best way to alleviate problems.

I found the plan and goal for creating The District on the history portion of The Dallas Arts District website. It states, “In 1978, Boston consultants Carr-Lynch recommended that Dallas relocate its major arts institutions from different parts of the city to the northeast corner of downtown. This location would allow for easy access through a vast network of freeways, as well as local streets, and leading into an area that would become a lively mix of cultural and commercial destinations, further defined by a mix of contemporary and historic architecture.”

It seems that plans to revitalize the area were doomed from the start. In taking all of the arts and cultural institutions dispersed throughout the city and relocating them in one area city planners effectively created a single-use zone. Single-use development now compounds already present low-density issues. The area now lacks the social and economic interaction necessary to foster a thriving community. Perhaps a more effective means of enhancing the city would have been to incorporate these buildings in neighborhoods that contained a variety of businesses and were not on their last legs.

(http://www.thedallasartsdistrict.org/district/hist...).

# Posted By Laurie Horesta | 12/4/11 10:21 PM

It's interesting to hear about this happening in Dallas, as a similar issue has come up in Miami. For the past ten years, Art Basel (which claims to be the most prestigious art show in the Americas) has set up shop in cheap gallery spaces throughout two impoverished North Miami neighborhoods: Wynwood and what is now called the "Design District." Both of these neighborhoods were two of the most racially segregated and impoverished in the country. The success of the art show led to an influx of artsy (generally middle to high income) individuals. Where there used to be wholesale, low-cost clothing manufacturers and public housing projects there are now extremely high-priced apartments and designer stores, not to mention the dozens of galleries that now call Miami home throughout the year. Because growth within Miami is constrained by water on two sides and the Everglades on another, the low-cost lots in North Miami provided the perfect opportunity for the city to expand upon its trendy / artsy image. Former residents of the two neighborhoods have mostly relocated even further north to cities like Ft. Lauderdale and Hollywood, a fact which creates a good deal of resentment in places that aspired toward the success of Miami.

# Posted By David Schwartz | 12/9/11 2:11 AM

[Add Comment]