Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Celine Gipoulon
2015 The German Marshall Fund of the United States. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF). Please direct inquiries to:
The German Marshall Fund of the United States
1744 R Street, NW
Washington, DC 20009
T 1 202 683 2650
F 1 202 265 1662
E info@gmfus.org
This publication can be downloaded for free at http://www.gmfus.org/listings/research.
The views expressed in GMF publications and commentary are the views of the author alone.
About the Author
Celine Gipoulon is a former project manager at the French National Agency for Urban Regeneration and was a 2013-14 Urban and
Regional Policy Fellow.
GMF Paper Series
The GMF Paper Series presents research on a variety of transatlantic topics by staff, fellows, and partners of the German Marshall
Fund of the United States. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of GMF. Comments from readers are welcome; reply to the mailing address above or by e-mail to info@gmfus.org.
About GMF
The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) strengthens transatlantic cooperation on regional, national, and global
challenges and opportunities in the spirit of the Marshall Plan. GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working in
the transatlantic sphere, by convening leaders and members of the policy and business communities, by contributing research and
analysis on transatlantic topics, and by providing exchange opportunities to foster renewed commitment to the transatlantic relationship. In addition, GMF supports a number of initiatives to strengthen democracies. Founded in 1972 as a non-partisan, non-profit
organization through a gift from Germany as a permanent memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF maintains a strong presence
on both sides of the Atlantic. In addition to its headquarters in Washington, DC, GMF has offices in Berlin, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade,
Ankara, Bucharest, and Warsaw. GMF also has smaller representations in Bratislava, Turin, and Stockholm.
On the cover: Pittsburgh bridges C. Gipoulon.
CONTENTS
Introduction 1
A Rising Interest for the U.S. Context
1
Bringing Lessons Back to France
1
Methodology 2
Overview of the Situation in France and the Interest in the Legacy City Examples
The PNRU: An Ambitious Public Policy but Limited Results in Certain Fields
Focusing on the United States: Why and How?
3
3
6
11
11
18
25
Key Factors of the Rust Belt Approach: What are the Lessons for France?
Strengthening Community Organization in France
Developing Multi-Actor Place-Based Strategies
Establishing Philanthropic Organizations
Targeting (Channeling) Private Money to Neighborhood Needs
Preserving City-Wide Strategies
33
33
37
39
41
44
Conclusion 47
References 49
List of Interviews
51
53
Introduction
predominance of public actors among the partnerships and funding sources were considered potential flaws. If these two factors are
improved, the relationship between physical
transformation and socioeconomic change
could also be stronger.
Methodology
The research focuses on the participation
of community-based organizations, private
actors, and non-profit organizations in the
revitalization strategies of three neighborhoods. In order to learn more about how and
why such strategies work in practice, my study
addressed the following research questions:
How does the involvement of a diversity
of actors influence the project definition
and process?
What kind of governance facilitates a
participatory planning process and how
could this arrangement be put in place?
How do successful examples work at
different levels?
What tools encourage better dialogue
around public-private partnerships (PPP)
and crossed investments?
Which models are adaptable to France,
and, if so, under what conditions?
To answer these questions, I undertook a
one-year research project based on three case
studies, ones in which multiple actors are
working together in a participatory plan2 | The German Marshall Fund of the United States
Overview of the Situation in France and the Interest in the Legacy City Examples
Figure 1
Though the French government has articulated different types of urban policies since
the 1980s, this approach represents a rupture
in several respects: the unprecedented
amount of investment (13 billion of national
public subsidies, generating 42 billion
of global investment); the comprehensive
urban approach with a complete masterplan
required for each area; and a simultaneous
focus on hundreds of different neighborhoods
throughout the country for at least a five-year
period. Compared with past programs, all of
these were quite innovative and less heavily
dedicated to the physical transformation of
the neighborhoods.4
source: ANRU
Figure 2
Figure 3
A public-driven program seeking a better inclusion of private actors and funders. PNRU Program
Funding Sources.
Source: ANRU Annual Report 2013
Figure 4
Precaution: An Impossible
France-U.S. Comparison?
Figure 5
Historical Population
Source: U.S. Decennial Census
Figure 6
Figure 7
St. Louis
Located at the Missouri and Mississippi
confluence, played a crucial role in river
commerce.
Heavily touched by urban sprawl. Since
1950, the metropolitan area has gained
200,000 residents even as the city lost
500,000.
The city is increasingly segregated, with
the North Side concentrating the African-American population.1
For decades, red-lining from lending
institutions and racial issues prevented
new investment in large swaths of the
city. This under-investment has resulted
in alarming data, such as a 19 percent
vacancy rate and a 27 percent household poverty rate.
1 http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/11/17/us/a-divided-st-louis.html. This article from The New York Times shows
interesting data to compare the North Side with the rest of the
city. It also focuses on the negative aspects of the neighborhoods reality without shedding light on collective initiatives
there.
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Main landmarks in the revitalization process
of Old North St. Louis
1950s-1970s
Mark Twain Highway construction
Population loss, abandonment, and
crime increase
1970s
Neighborhood begins to organize
1981
Dreation of Old North St. Louis Revitalization Group
Designation as a national historic district
1990s
Work on the local history
First planning process
Adoption of CDC structure
2001
First hired staff
North Market Dtreet masterplan
Construction of first few houses in the
neighborhood
2008-10
Crown Square project
Reopening of main commercial street
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Cleveland
Experienced tremendous demographic
growth with the creation of the Erie Canal
between Ohio River and Great Lakes,
and soon became a major manufacturing
center.
From the 1880s to the 1930s, corporate
and civic leaders founded several major
public institutions (museums, schools,
health amenities) in a vast green area
that became University Circle.
From the 1960s onward, different factors
economic decline, suburbanization,
and racial riots led to racial segregation, abandonment, and impoverishment
in parts of the city, especially the eastern
neighborhoods.
Figure 14
Figure 15
Cleveland Neighborhoods.
Source Livecleveland.com
the motivation and the ability to work wherever it wants, with local partners and especially with local communities.
One of these efforts is the Greater University
Circle Initiative (GUCI). In 2005, the foundation realized that the institutions in the area
had planned new developments and funded
The GUCI has been a way for the foundation to shift away from its traditional role of
acting in a responsive way at a small scale. The
initiative focus area is four square miles and
includes portions of the surrounding neighborhoods (including Fairfax, Glenville, and
Hough). It had the opportunity to intervene
in a whole swath of the city, overcoming each
actors typical geographical limits (University
Circle, other CDCs). In a context like Clevelands, the foundation was the only actor able
to develop a multi-neighborhood strategy
thanks to its legitimacy and its financial
capacity. As the below chart shows, the foundation has had a tremendous direct financial
impact on the strategy.
Figure 18
Pittsburgh
One of the most economically vibrant
U.S. cities in the 19th century, largely
based on the steel industry.
Important magnet for immigrant workers
and home to famous entrepreneurs like
Carnegie, Frick, the Mellons, and Heinz
during the industrial era.
Philanthropists launched education, arts,
or health programs for their employees
and built amenities such as libraries,
museums, schools, and universities in
order to support them.
Local assets, particularly foundations,
became a significant resource for the city
as it attempted to overcome the collapse
of local industries in the 1980s.
Shelters a huge high tech cluster but has
also significantly enhanced quality of life
during these last few decades.
Figure 19
Figure 20
Pittsburgh Neighborhoods
Source: pinsburgh.com
The strategy ELDI embraced in the neighborhood follows the goals that the initial plan
expressed:
to offer mixed-income residential options
in order to have a wide range of housing
and welcome middle-income families;
to turn the neighborhood back into a
retail destination and a mixed-used area;
to function as a community diverse in
itself but also capable of serving residents
from Pittsburghs other neighborhoods.
It was an ambitious vision considering the
condition of East Liberty in the 1990s. Very
soon, ELDI realized that it would need a
strong cohort of partners to be successful in
implementing it.
Located on the edge of the East Liberty neighborhood, the Bakery Square development has
become a flagship for the citys revitalization
since Google located a branch there. The
details of the redevelopment project show
the combined influences of different actors
previously mentioned: the universitys role in
attracting and developing high-tech companies, the citys efforts to support physical
reconversion through public agencies, and the
role of the local CDC in fostering a welcoming
environment for newcomers and developing
employment for local residents.
Program
The Bakery Square Development involved the
rehabilitation and redevelopment of an old
Nabisco factory on a 6.5 acre property. It also
included the development of 380,000 square
feet of retail and office space, a 110-room
hotel, and more than 1,000 parking places. It
also benefits from various public transit lines.
Process
The Regional Industrial Development Corporation (RIDC) bought the building in 1999
after Nabisco closed the 80-year-old plant.
It leased it to two successive corporations,
neither of whom managed to keep it in operation. In 2007, the RIDC received a $1 million
grant for environmental remediation from the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection. Walnut Capital, a private developer, purchased the property from RIDC in
2007 for $5.4 million, added $1.3 million for
the cleanup, and led the redevelopment. Using
the tax credit system, the Urban Revitalization
Agency contributed to the refurbishment of
the building. Before leading the redevelopment, Walnut Capital contacted the community, specifically council members and ELDI.
Funding
Along with sustainable LEED-certified
design, public funds played a major role
in this redevelopment. The total cost for
the Bakery Square Development was $135
million, including a mix of public and private
funding. A $1 million grant from the Department of Environmental Protection was used
toward the cleanup and acted as a catalyst for
public-private financing. The development
received a historic tax credit and $10 million
in state tax increment financing, acquired
with help from the Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Pittsburgh. Renovation of nearby
infrastructure and roads was included in the
projects scope.
Figure 22
Results
The Marriot Spring Suites Hotel was the first
tenant to open for business, in May 2010.
Soon after, Google moved in from Carnegie
Mellon Universitys Campus, and tripled its
occupancy to 115,000 square feet within one
year. The attraction of this big-name company
to a formerly disadvantaged neighborhood is
a combination of both a competitive university able to attract it to its campus first and
the success of the Bakery Square redevelopment. The role the ELID played cannot
be discounted. Since the 1980s, ELDI had
attracted approximately 200 new businesses
and over $80 million in investment. It is
expected that Bakery Square itself will create
1,600 jobs.
In 2013, after this site was opened, Walnut
Capital acquired the site of a former school
Key Factors of the Rust Belt Approach: What are the Lessons for France?
Strengthening Community
Organization in France
In the United States, CDCs are organizations
that are dedicated to a neighborhoods interests for a wide range of topics. They conceive
of and deliver their own solutions, like any
other actors in the planning process. Nonetheless, they are based on the empowerment of
residents, and need to have an operational role
in a planning process to be effective actors.
Successive official reports in France have
asked for more citizen representation in the
revitalization process. How could the CDC
example inform the French system? Under
what conditions could the French top-down
political and institutional system empower
local communities?
Table 1
Comparison of CDCs and Conseils Citoyens
Composition
Activities
Sources of Funding
Developing Multi-Actor
Place-Based Strategies
From the beginning, CDCs were meant to
be part of wider partnerships and to engage
private actors. When he launched the
Economic Opportunity Act in 1964, Robert
Kennedy declared the need to combine the
best of community action with the best of the
private enterprise system. Neither by itself is
enough but in their combination lie our hopes
for the future. This expresses intent to use not
only residents energy but also the potential of
other local actors to achieve economic revival.
In struggling U.S. cities, traditional institutions such as hospitals and universities are
often the only large employers left. Their
participation in the planning process creates
new opportunities that no politician or public
agency could propose. But anchor institutions might not be able to play a similar
role in France. Many of them are funded by
the public sector and are currently facing
important budgets cuts. But even if resources
cannot be counted as key assets, the process
leading to the involvement of non-traditional actors should be studied carefully. How
could we raise institutional or private actors
awareness and involvement in the community
building process? Who would be the right
actor in the French context to take on this
task?
adjacent neighborhoods and their bad reputation.23 There is a need for innovative strategies to reconnect these institutions with local
interests.
Despite these obstacles, institutional anchors
have other resources to share (training,
culture). Tenuous as their finances may be,
they often remain important employers and
service consumers. Beyond institutions like
hospitals or universities, private companies
also should be targeted. Private companies in
France increasingly tend to locate new offices
in low-income neighborhoods because of
cheaper real estate or because of tax incentives
given by local authorities. They sometimes
consider such locations problematic and
develop security systems instead of involving
themselves in local communities.24 The organizational pattern used for anchor districts in
the United States could be used for any kind
of organizations, including private ones.
As with the Greater University Circle Initiative, the effectiveness of any collaborative
process will depend on the extent to which the
institutions voluntarily commit to participate
without any contract or legal requirement.
A climate could be created to encourage this
participation.
23 http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2014/03/25/a-toulouse-luniversitemirail-a-honte-quartier-250969
24 De sa forteresse, SFR regarde Saint-Denis (From its fortress,
SFR is looking at St Denis,) Le Monde http://banlieue.blog.lemonde.
fr/2014/01/18/1134/; http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2014/05/02/
saint-denis-nouveau-quartier-daffaires-9-3-bunkerise-251904
(Saint-Denis, the new business district is turning into a bunker).
Establishing Philanthropic
Organizations
The two previous examples show the interest
in widening the partnerships and involving
grassroots actors. In France, it is very difficult
for traditional actors to initiate new dynamics
or encourage other groups to enter the decision process. The following section considers
how French foundations could potentially
be involved. They are deeply rooted in U.S.
culture, but while weak, they are not totally
non-existent in France. How could their
development be encouraged to target disadvantaged neighborhoods?
Foundations
What a Foundation Can Do
Funds interventions of all kinds,
including urban/social development,
executive budgets, or project-based
investments
Target individual initiatives without any
rules for reproducibility or equity
Rapidly release important funding
Respond to ongoing strategies or initiate
their own
Intervene on different scales
Specific Foundation Achievements
Capacity of innovation due to a very flexible pattern of intervention
Potential financial subsidiarity to public
funders when there are common goals
Conditions and Limits
No compliance necessary with other
partners strategies
necessarily have to seek immediate cost-effectiveness or reproducibility. They are key actors
for innovation.
Community development is a long-term
target for many foundations in the United
States. Their financial support is very helpful
for place-based initiatives to produce results.
Foundations often require fewer conditions
than public funding. The immediate results
they allow give credibility to communities
initiatives and thus strengthen both these
initiatives and the organizations that lead
them. They are also able to fund overhead
costs, executive budgets, and staff training.
The other side of this autonomy is that it is
very difficult to encourage or force foundations to be part of wider partnerships if they
make the decision not to be involved. They
are the only ones to evaluate the effect of their
interventions, and because of their financial
capacity, they are often in a position of power
compared to municipalities. In addition, the
number of foundations and the diversity
of their interventions can sometimes blur
strategies within the same neighborhood or
geographic area. For example, this has been
a growing problem in Pittsburgh, where
attempts at cooperation between foundations
have not been successful until very recently.
neighborhoods. This system tends to maintain or increase gaps with the most deprived
neighborhoods. For example, the way public
(CDBG) funding is distributed in Cleveland
or St. Louis is simple: each councilmember
receives the same amount of money regardless
of the neighborhood situation and chooses
how to use the grant. This creates a large role
for councilmembers and leaves no room for
equalization between neighborhoods.
The way the city of Pittsburgh managed to
define and implement a long-term vision
even with scarce resources proves that the
city can still play a decisive role in terms of
planning, initiating partnerships, targeting
investments, and supporting a comprehensive
community development framework. There is
also a greater awareness among philanthropic
actors that an overarching plan is necessary.
The philanthropic sector in Pittsburgh, for
instance, recently issued a report calling for
more cooperation between foundations and
a citywide approach to solving long-standing
policy issues.32
Is Bottom-Up Compatible
with French Cities?
more than just a seat at someone elses decision-making process, but this process often
lacks coherence at the city level. The French
system, with strong leadership at the city level,
generally produces a robust vision and plans
for the whole city, but leaves little room for
other actors.
The successful development of bottom-up
initiatives in France requires some evolution in
the mayors role and power. The mayors exclusive dialogue with the national government as
well as the offices role in bilateral negotiations
with the different actors in the city would be
compromised by new partnerships and decision-making patterns. Such a change seems
difficult to reach, and it leads some researchers
to be pessimistic about its possible implementations.33 Nonetheless, the different case studies
show the tremendous benefit of preserving
citywide planning strategies and a comprehensive vision, and the importance of strong
leadership that makes decisions and strategic
investments at the city level.
In France, the law requires planning documents at a city or metropolitan scale for
land use, housing, transportation, economic
development, and neighborhood revitalization. This allows for the visibility of spatial
disparities and helps target public resources to
balance inequalities. These documents could
also serve as a basis for building wider and
more sustainable partnerships between public,
private, and institutional actors and making
33 Vers un empowerment la franaise ? A propos du rapport
Bacqu-Mechmache, la Vie des Ides. Thomas Kirszbaum
Figure 23
Conclusion
References
Annual Report, East Liberty Inc, 2007, 2009,
2010,
Bakery Square Development, Western Pennsylvania Brownfield Center, N.D.
Bakery Square 2.0 Development, Western
Pennsylvania Brownfield Center, N.D.
The Big Rethink: Positioning Pittsburgh for the
Next Stage of Urban Regeneration, Summary
Report: Pittsburgh is at a Critical Pivot Point
in its Development, Mt. Auburn Associates,
July 2012
Clevelands Greater University Circle Initiative:
Building a 21st Century City through the
Power of Anchor Institution Collaboration,
The Cleveland Foundation, 2014
Cleveland Turns Uptown Into New Downtown, Schneider, The New York Times,
November 29, 2011
De sa forteresse, SFR regarde Saint-Denis,
Zappi, February 5, 2014
Dix ans de PNRU: Bilan et Perspectives
rapport de la mission dvaluation confie au
Conseil dOrientation de lONZUS, Malgorn,
Ministre de la Ville, 2013
LEnpowerment, nouvel horizon de la politique
de la ville, Zappi, Le Monde, February 7,
2013
Unevenly Spread: What Neighborhood Development Really Means in Cleveland and the
Challenges Facing the CDCs on the Near
East and West Sides, Allard, Cleveland
Scene, 2014
University Unites Uptown, Macht, Urbanland, February 20, 2013
Vers un empowerment la franaise? A propos
du rapport Bacqu-Mechmache, Kirszbaum,
la Vie des Ides, 2013
A Vision for East Liberty, Community Plan,
East Liberty Inc, 1999
Welcome to Your New Government: Can
Non-Profits Run Cities? Clark, Forefront
Issue 013 Volume 1, 2012
List of Interviews
Washington DC
Cleveland
Rosalynn Huguey
Senior Staff
Office of Planning
DC City Government
Joe Schilling
Senior Fellow
Metro Institute
Virginia Tech
Lawrence Handerhan
Program Manager
Office for International and Philanthropic
Innovation
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development
Brett Theodos
Senior Research Associate
Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy
Center
Urban Institute
Kim Graziani
Vice President and Director of National
Technical Assistance
Center for Community Progress
David Bowers
Local Office Director
Enterprise Community Partners
Sanda Kaufman
Director
Master of Arts in Environmental Studies
Program
Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban
Affairs
Kirby Date
Program Manager
The Community Planning Program
Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban
Affairs
Kathy Hexter
Director
Center for Community Planning and
Development
Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban
Affairs
Lara Kalafatis
Vice President
Development and University Relations
Case Western Reserve University
Chris Ronayne
President
University Circle Inc.
Mark Mac Dermott
Vice President and Ohio Market Leader
Enterprise Community Partners, Inc.
Bobbi Reichtell
Executive Director
Campus District
Anthony Coyne
Chairman
Cleveland Planning Commission
Lilian Kuri
Program Director for Architecture
Urban Design
and Sustainable Development
Cleveland Foundation
Evelyn Burnett
Vice President
Economic Opportunity
Neighborhood Progress, Inc.
Claudia Coulton
Lillian F. Harris Professor of Urban Social
Research
Jack, Joseph, and Morton Mandel School of
Applied Social Sciences
Case Western Reserve University
Steve Standley
Chief Administrative Officer
University Hospitals of Cleveland
Michael J. Schipper
Deputy General Manager
Engineering & Project Management
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Agency
Tanisha Rush
President
Community Economic Development
Management Solutions
Denise Van Leer
Assistant Executive Director
Fairfax Renaissance Development Corporation
Carrie Rosenfelt
Community Development Relationship
Manager
Huntington National Bank
Taryn Gress
Project Coordinator
National Initiative on Mixed-Income
Communities
Case Western Reserve University
Colleen Gilson
Vice President - CDC Service
Neighborhood Progress, Inc
Robert Brown
Director of City Planning
City of Cleveland
Jeff Ramsey
Executive Director
Detroit Shoreway Community Development
Organization
Jill Claybour
Director
Community Development Administration
City of St. Louis
Thomas Logan
Journalist
The Post Dispatch
Sandra Moore
President
Urban Strategies
Barbara Levin
Program Coordinator
Alliance for Building Capacities
George Warren Brown
School of Social Work
Washington University
Stephen Acree
Executive Director
RISE St. Louis
St. Louis
Pittsburgh
Sean Thomas
Executive Director
Old North St. Louis Restoration Group
Michael Allen
Director
Preservation Research Office
Todd Swanstorm
Professor of Community Collaboration and
Public Policy Administration
University of Missouri
Don Roe
Director
Planning & Urban Design Agency
City of St. Louis
Richard A. Stafford
Distinguished Service Professor of Public Policy
H. John Heinz III College
School of Public Policy and Management
Carnegie Mellon University
Lisa Quattrochi
Community Development Relationship
Manager
Huntington National Bank
Laurel Shaw Randi
Senior Program Officer
McCune Foundation
Tom Murphy
Senior Resident Fellow
GMF OFFICES
Washington Berlin Paris Brussels Belgrade Ankara Bucharest Warsaw
www.gmfus.org