Inkster Cultural Arts District

Overview

Among the plethora of problems facing American cities today, slow job growth, declining home values, a diminishing tax base, and concentrated poverty top the list. Across the country, as governments find ways to successfully segue into a future spearheaded by innovative, sustainable civic solutions, there are communities experiencing slower or severely delayed gains, with some showing signs of regression. Perhaps there is no better example of this than Inkster, MI. Located less than 6 miles from Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport to the south, just under 14 miles west of Detroit and 22 miles east of Ann Arbor, and with a population of just over 24,000 (roughly, half of the capacity of Comerica Park’s 41,297), Inkster’s 6.25 square miles function inefficiently and grossly under capacity. The following statistics paint the blighted picture of Inkster’s disconnected, socially and economically disenfranchised population:

• Median resident age:
• 33.0 years
• Michigan median age:
• 39.6 years

• Estimated median household income in 2013: $26,063 (it was $35,950 in 2000) Estimated per capita income in

• 2013: $14,406 (it was $16,711 in 2000)
• Estimated median house or condo value in 2013: $49,847 (it was $67,300 in 2000)
• Mean prices in 2013: All housing units: $62,955; Detached houses: $63,754; Townhouses or other attached units: $62,802; In 2-unit structures: $23,175
• Renters: 39.75%
• Vacancy Rate: 19.20%
• Median gross rent in 2013: $721
• School Expenditure: $4,883
  [The dollar amount that the local school district spends on each of its students.]
• Pupil/Teacher Ratio: 35.2
  [The number of students for each teacher. For example, 19.1 means there are 19.1 pupils for each teacher in the school.]
• Students per Librarian: 1366
  [The number of students for each Librarian. For example, 907 means there are 907 pupils per Librarian.]
• Students per Counselor: 4098
  [The number of students for each Counselor. For example, 546 means there are 546 pupils per Counselor.]
• 2 yr College Graduate: 5.62%
  [The percentage of the area's population over the age of 25 with an Associate Degree or other 2-year college degree.]
• 4 yr College Graduate: 7.44%
  [The percentage of the area's population over the age of 25 with a bachelor's degree or other 4-year college degree.]
• Graduate Degrees: 4.95%
  [The percentage of the area's population over the age of 25 with a master's degree, Ph.D. or other advanced college degree.]
• High School Graduates: 74.49%
  [The percentage of the area's population over the age of 25 with high school diplomas or high school equivalency degrees (GEDs).]
  

The Argument For

Berlin, Germany

Although many cities have benefited from using Public Art to redefine themselves (i.e.: New York, New Orleans, Miami, Atlanta, etc.), none serve so perfectly as a demographic model for Inkster as Berlin, Germany. Once known as an industrial giant, Berlin suffered an epic implosion caused by its’ inability to compete with the emergence of European cities with the foresight to align themselves with the rapidly changing global economy. Berlin found itself in drastic contrast to other European cities that had successfully implemented modern ideas to move them into a modern Europe. While other European cities reimagined, reinvented and rebuilt themselves, Berlin was marred by decaying infrastructure, joblessness and blight. The fall of The Berlin Wall in 1989 serves as both, historical event and poetic metaphor; the removal of an antiquated and restrictive physical barrier as well as the removal of an antiquated and restrictive social barrier. Free of decades old, nonsensical impediments, East and West Germans refashioned the city of Berlin as, not only a destination, but as a beacon of Culture and Art in Europe. By making use of the transformative power of Public Arts, Berlin became a magnet for artists seeking three things:

• the freedom to create
• the resources to innovate
• the space to create and innovate safely

In 2005, Berlin was awarded the title "City of Design" by UNESCO. Today, the city has a very diverse art scene and is home to over 700 art galleries. Berlin receives a federal subsidy of €11 billion to grow culture and tourism. Entire industries have sprouted in response to the demand made of Berlin to deliver as the epicenter of the Arts in Europe, i.e.:

• the hostel industry (788 hostels with 28.7 million overnight stays and 11.9 million guests in 2014)
• the aerospace industry (17,000 jobs – 5,500 in manufacturing and maintenance, 700 at universities and institutes, 10,000 at airports, and nearly 3,000 at airports)
• the arts industry (around 22,600 creative enterprises, predominantly SMEs, which generated over €18,6 billion in total revenue)

Transforming Berlin into Germany’s most prosperous city happened both strategically and organically. Berlin’s government chose to follow the lead of the Oregon Experiment. With the Oregon Experiment, city planners merged traditional and innovative methods to redesign a public park. The traditional thinking is that planners, in conjunction with developers and local government, decide the design of the city with autonomy. Without community input, serious design flaws marginalize vast numbers of a community’s residents, and may be a direct cause of flight; when people are not serviced with amenities, they leave for places that offer them. With the Oregon Experiment, city planners observed how the community utilized the park and planned around that data; instead of forcing the design of paths, benches, fountains and open areas, the designers allowed how the park was being utilized to dictate how the redesign would look and function. Similarly, Berlin’s government recognized Public Arts at the core of the renewed interest in Berlin and planned around that information. From underground raves and makeshift nightclubs, popup events and open-air concerts, to street art and graffiti, Berlin, for Creatives, was a haven and destination in Europe. The planning of a new Berlin would include supporting Public Arts with resources and less restrictive legislation. This approach would become the catalyst for Berlin’s socioeconomic renewal. The key to utilizing Public Art as an effective tool for revitalization and renewal depends on three things:

• attracting and retaining talent
• utilizing technology
• creating a climate of legislative tolerance

The Argument Against

The SoHo Effect

After the diversity that once served as a draw for Creatives has been forced out due to skyrocketing rents, after the large retail chains have set up shop in their places, and after the freshness of visible development wears off, areas like SoHo in Manhattan become unrecognizable to those responsible for making it a destination and cultural hot spot. This phenomenon is called “gentrification.” Gentrification is the process of renovation and revival of economically disenfranchised areas by means of influx of more affluent residents, which results in increased property values and the displacing of lower-income families and small businesses. Although gentrification can offer a rapid solution to many of a community’s economic ills, SoHo may be the best example of how gentrification’s lasting effects are temporary and marginal, and offer little in regards to viably sustainable options for lasting revitalization and renewal.

“If the community is well-organized (or perhaps we should say “perfectly” organized) then it will have devised some institutions and methods to support and encourage its citizens to undertake these community improvement actions. It will identify all those persons in the community who stand to benefit from the community improvements and convince them to contribute their own resources, time and efforts towards these actions in an amount that equals their individual marginal benefit of the actions experienced over a lifetime in the community. Even if the community is thus successful in overcoming the “free rider” problem (in which some members of the community do not contribute because they hope to benefit from the efforts and expenditures of others) a problem may arise if many residents are at risk of displacement. Suppose that each private resident believes that there is a 50% chance that he or she will be compelled to leave the community because gentrification forces rents to unaffordable (or unattractive) levels or for other reasons. In such a situation, the expected value of the benefits of community improvement actions will be significantly reduced to persons who are at risk of displacement. As a result, they will value their own benefits to be received from community improvement at a reduced level, indicated by the Marginal Benefit of Action with Gentrification line.”

If erasure of community histories and narratives is a direct byproduct of gentrification, then irresponsible city planning and poor design implementation are accomplices to the culpability of gentrification. Completely disregarding the historical narratives of the community histories existing there prior to gentrification, SoHo has become to sustainable communities what outdoor strip malls are to civic amenities: unexceptional. And, just as strip malls are not considered reasons to move to a city, fewer and fewer people are relocating to SoHo because it no longer offers what it once did; an inviting, innovative and vibrant Arts Culture, making way for a safe space to create.

Ultimately, SoHo’s rate of growth and economic development has come to a halt, some suggesting signs of economic regression. The lack of the sustainability of gentrification as a business model serves only as a reason to continue in its’ practice. As areas like SoHo work to gentrify, they trade Public Art for business models that lack the inherent ability to reinvent themselves, subsequently trading away their greatest tool and asset to lasting development: the draw for more Public Art and the amenities shackled to it. Ironically, cities like Detroit are seeing an exodus of SoHo Creatives, migrating in search of accessible spaces to create. What they are finding when they arrive is bureaucratic red tape preventing them from creating an environment ripe for sustainability and a corporate and governmental narrative not in congruence with that of the existing communities. Avoiding these kinds of design flaws are critical in developing a civic renewal plan that promotes longevity. Sheppard argues that subjecting communities “to an increased probability of displacement makes the social cost of gentrification more severe.” He further states that “we should be asking what levels of community improvement actions would be taking place if neighborhoods were not subject to the elevated levels of turnover that gentrification displacement brings.”

Sustainability

If the community is the public park, the citizens are the paths, benches, fountains and open areas that adorn it. There exists a direct correlation between a vibrant Arts culture and a strong local economy. And, just as the viability of a community depends on its members contributing to the whole, Public Arts is, arguably, the most important component in any redevelopment effort. Public Art is simultaneously anchor and vessel, firmly defining an area’s identity while constantly evolving, inviting newness and inventiveness. Reimagining Inkster its esthetic identity and purpose in the region is not only feasible and sustainable, it is of the quintessence.