319 replies to this topic

[Cassidy]

6 million bucks probably stabilizes for the long term what they already have as an architectural assembly, and gives a little bit extra to build a new entrance, or a new gallery ... but the likelihood that the remainder of the money will arrive is low, and thus the "glass crystal" will probably never get built.

 

It's difficult, if not impossible to procure 24 million additional dollars for an art gallery in a city where over two thirds of the population has never even visited ... indeed, there are likely many CRD residents that don't know where the Art Gallery is located.

 

The ridiculous part is that the 30 million dollar investment is planned for a residential area (Rockland) on a piece of property about 5-8 times too small to create a proper exhibition space. Their plans to expand the existing property strongly betray the Art Gallery Board of Directors belief that they won't receive the full 30 million dollars necessary to complete their vision.

If they thought the $30 million was a done deal, they'd be shopping around for a new location.

 

Centennial Square (tear down the parkade), Rock Bay, Ships Point ... pick your spot - ALL would make a better choice than a residential street in far Rockland, as far away from tourists and visitors as you could get and still be in the City, and with a grand total of around 12 parking spots, with the streets reserved for residential parking only.

 

It's a ridiculous location to dream of investing $30 million in an art gallery ... and thus a ridiculous project to even invest the initial $6 million bucks in.

Edited by Cassidy, 18 June 2018 - 08:24 AM.

[Mike K.]

The location is quite nice, and I’ve turned around on its off-the-beaten-path, tucked away setting. It’s neat to have such hidden gems and to spread our cultural love around.

But that being said, $30 million for such a location could be a tough sell and going by the opposition to Abtract’s Rockland project, will this expansion sail through, particularly as the concept inched closer to reality?

[Bingo]

The location is quite nice, and I’ve turned around on its off-the-beaten-path, tucked away setting. It’s neat to have such hidden gems and to spread our cultural love around.

 

Car parking is scarce, but the cyclists will love it just uphill from the Fort Street bike path.

[aastra]

So what's the status of some of the past donations to this project? On paper this would be some pretty impressive fundraising for a small gallery:

 

 

From 2016:

 

...the Audain Foundation, has pledged $2 million to support the expansion plans of the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria. Audain is Chairman of Polygon Homes Ltd., one of British Columbia’s leading home builders.

...The gift is contingent upon the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria Next Gallery receiving the necessary funding from the Province of British Columbia during the 2017 calendar year.

 

 

From 2014:

A $14-million expansion and renovation of the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria will start in March 2016 and finish 18 months later, if all goes according to plan.

A fundraising campaign will begin next year, she said. It received a kick-start in January when Oak Bay artist Anthony Thorn donated $2.5 million.

 

 

From 2017:

Local philanthropist Andrew Beckerman has pledged his personal art collection valued at $750,000 and $100,000 in cash to the Art Gallery of Victoria’s Next Gallery, the expansion of the Gallery’s Moss Street home. Beckerman has challenged others in his adopted home of Victoria, British Columbia to match his generous and substantial gift.

In addition the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria has received two anonymous pledges of $500,000 and $200,000 respectively.

...the two anonymous gifts are contingent upon the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria Next Gallery receiving the necessary funding from the Province of British Columbia during the 2017 calendar year.

 

 

From 2016:

Late Victoria art lover and philanthropist Rosita LeSueur Tovell has bequeathed $1.1 million to the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria (AGGV) to support the Gallery’s continuing exhibitions and programming.

“Rosita’s philanthropic leadership will allow us to develop incredible new exhibitions for the AGGV both now and in our new building,” said Jon Tupper, AGGV director.

Edited by aastra, 18 June 2018 - 03:21 PM.

[Cassidy]

Successful art galleries are heavily dependent on visitors and/or tourists to make a serious go of their efforts.

 

If the AGGV is going to spend $30 million on a "new" facility, then they're going to have to serve a LOT more patrons that they're currently serving. 

The current location has always been a bit funky to be sure, but it's definitely way too far off the tourist track to be considered a "must see" destination. Even it a tourist has a car, they're going to arrive to 12 occupied parking spaces and nowhere to park on the street.

 

Successful art galleries are always downtown core affairs (there are a very few exceptions), easy to walk to, and big enough to contain the majority of the galleries collection. 

 

The business plan for a vastly expanded art gallery just doesn't support massive development in their current location. 

[Bingo]

Successful art galleries are heavily dependent on visitors and/or tourists to make a serious go of their efforts.

Successful art galleries are always downtown core affairs (there are a very few exceptions), easy to walk to, and big enough to contain the majority of the galleries collection. 

The business plan for a vastly expanded art gallery just doesn't support massive development in their current location. 

 

Successful galleries are often in larger cities than Victoria where the walking distances in town are further.

From the float plane terminal in the harbour the walking distance to the present Art Gallery is 2km and a 30 minute walk.

From the float plane terminal to a hypothetical Art Gallery in the Vic High building the time and distance is similar.

Local Victorians are more likely to visit an Art  Gallery that is NOT downtown where the parking is limited.

[Bingo]

Yes the float plane terminal is just an example. Gallery patrons do not need to fly in. 

[Nparker]

...Local Victorians are more likely to visit an Art  Gallery that is NOT downtown where the parking is limited.

But they are likely to visit a low-key location in a residential neighbourhood where the parking is extremely limited? 

[Cassidy]

Having done both walks ... I'd call a 30 minute walk through mid-town Manhattan to visit The Museum of Modern Art then on up to the Metropolitan Museum vastly different, and far more interesting than taking a 30 minute walk from downtown Victoria up into Rockland (unless old houses turned into offices, 60's apartment buildings, and a gas station or two are on your list of "must see's").

 

Tourists simply won't make that walk, as clearly demonstrated by the minuscule numbers of tourists walking up to the current art gallery and Craigdarroch Castle clearly demonstrate.

I drive up Fort St all the time during the day, and I'm afraid I just don't see those multitudes of tourist groups hoofing it up Fort or Rockland to the art gallery.

 

To be fair ... the current art gallery, in the current location is just fine ... but my point was about an art gallery with a pending $30 million investment, with a location on a couple of smallish residential lots, no parking of note, and far, far away from the Victoria tourist stroll.

 

It makes no sense from a business perspective, at least not $30 million worth of sense (or really even $6 million worth of sense).

[Torrontes]

I didn't realize that the principal purpose of the AGGV was as a tourist attraction. I thought it was to make art accessible to people of all ages, background and abilities in the greater Victoria Region, including local schools and community members, so as to enrich their understanding of art and practice.

 

Large established galleries can aspire to be major tourist attractions, but they need a substantial base of support to undertake that transformation (and then struggle to maintain their status). The AGGV is working on it, but they have a long way to go. They certainly don't have the funds to sell up in Rockland and build a larger facility, with parking, downtown, as has been suggested. If they were to find a large corporate benefactor, such as TELUS, to provide them with space, it might work, but staging major exhibitions are expensive undertakings.

 

Little point in comparing Victoria to London, New York or Paris. There are certainly more than a few galleries not in downtown areas, e.g. J. Paul Getty Museum, Munch Museum, Glasgow School of Art, Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, McMichael Gallery, etc., etc..

 

Size is definitely not everything.

[Nparker]

I didn't realize that the principal purpose of the AGGV was as a tourist attraction. I thought it was to make art accessible to...the greater Victoria Region...

I am not sure it is doing an especially good job of either at the moment. If asked, how many residents of the CRD could even tell you where the AGGV is located? Spending millions to expand at the current site isn't going to change things very much. 

[Jackerbie]

I am not sure it is doing an especially good job of either at the moment. If asked, how many residents of the CRD could even tell you where the AGGV is located? Spending millions to expand at the current site isn't going to change things very much. 

 

If asked, how many residents of the CRD could even tell you that the AGGV existed? I didn't even know Victoria had an art gallery until this discussion came up.

[Nparker]

If asked, how many residents of the CRD could even tell you that the AGGV existed? ...

I was thinking the same thing actually, but I thought I'd at least give it the benefit of the doubt.

[Cassidy]

I didn't realize that the principal purpose of the AGGV was as a tourist attraction. I thought it was to make art accessible to people of all ages, background and abilities in the greater Victoria Region, including local schools and community members, so as to enrich their understanding of art and practice.

.......

 

Little point in comparing Victoria to London, New York or Paris. There are certainly more than a few galleries not in downtown areas, e.g. J. Paul Getty Museum, Munch Museum, Glasgow School of Art, Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, McMichael Gallery, etc., etc..

I don't think anybody said the principal purpose of an art gallery is tourism ... I myself noted that, for an investment of $30 million, a well thought out business plan would incorporate tourism as a major component. Victoria is (after all) a tourist town.

I further noted that a "serious go" at an effective business plan would definitely have to incorporate tourism as a major component ... which is terribly obvious to anybody bothering to look at the Art Gallery proposal with any level of intelligent consideration.

 

I also made a point of highlighting that there WERE limited exceptions to successful art galleries in downtown cores when I specifically posted this:

"Successful art galleries are always downtown core affairs (there are a very few exceptions), easy to walk to, and big enough to contain the majority of the galleries collection".

 

Salient to the conversation is that we're not talking about the current Art Gallery in its current location ... rather we're talking about a potential development that will spend some $30 million tax dollars on an updated facility.

If the Art Gallery proposes to be tapping into taxpayers wallets, then that makes this all just a bit more complicated than pushing a $30 million facility in a residential neighborhood with no parking, and expressly designed  for teaching locals to appreciate art.

 

It's all just a bit more complex than that, and a new location that allows for an effective tourism component is a major part of that complexity.

Edited by Cassidy, 20 June 2018 - 11:46 AM.

[Rob Randall]

The AGGV is a 20 minute walk from Downtown.

 

You could visit any major museum in the world and you'd be fortunate if your hotel was less than a 20 minute walk away.

[Mike K.]

Major museum, yes, but an art gallery nobody’s ever heard of is not exactly a major priority for your average visitor.

[Cassidy]

The AGGV is a 20 minute walk from Downtown.

 

You could visit any major museum in the world and you'd be fortunate if your hotel was less than a 20 minute walk away.

I'm all for a vibrant, exciting Art Gallery in Victoria - I even donate money to the one we're presently talking about ... it's just a ridiculous concept to try to build that new and exciting art gallery on top of a couple of too small residential lots, two clicks away from the Inner Harbour, and with essentially no parking.

Any well though out business plan would make that point clearly based on the very few tourists and the less than 1/3 of Greater Victoria residents who make use of the existing facility currently.

 

A new, $30 million art gallery needs to be a truly accessible, world class space for the galleries Asian and Emily Carr holdings ... some being the finest in the Canada. Some other AGGV pieces are considered among the finest in the world.

 

Simply put, the current location is fine for the existing facility, but positing a $30 million renovation, the distant residential corner of Moss St and Willspencer Place is the wrong location altogether.

[lanforod]

Go big or go home, put it on the waterfront parking lots, it'd be a lot better than the lawns currently planned.

[Cassidy]

Go big or go home, put it on the waterfront parking lots, it'd be a lot better than the lawns currently planned.

Exactly! - and for $30 million such a plan is entirely possible ... if the City, the Province, and the Harbour Commission were all on board.

 

It'll never happen of course, all because of the fundamental lack of a future focused and detailed plan for the arts in the COV and the CRD, but it's nice to dream for a moment that it could.

 

I suspect the Board of Directors of the Art Gallery already know this though ... which is why they will take whatever money they're given and do what they can with it, all the while remaining where they are now (rather than winding up homeless like say ... the Maritime Museum).

 

Why build a world class art gallery on the shore of the Inner Harbour when the COV and the CRD can spend that same amount of time, energy, and money building state-of-the-art facilities and infrastructure for beggars, thieves and drug addicts from across Canada?

[Torrontes]

I get it. The COV and CRD are better off pursuing the development of an art gallery that will attract well-heeled tourists, who will then provide handouts to downtown panhandlers who are issued residency identification.

 

That is an option.