Cultural Spaces Infrastructure Report - Strategic Update PDF Free Download
1 / 201/201
100%
Cultural Spaces Infrastructure Report
April 9, 2025
Strategic Update
Final Report
by AEA Consulting for Calgary Arts Development
Cultural Spaces Infrastructure Report – Strategic Update
Contents
1. Executive Summary
2. Strategy, Investment and Policy Context
3. Calgary’s Ecosystem of Cultural Spaces
4. The Challenging Financial Landscape
5. Good Practices from Peer Cities
6. Proposed Framework for Action
Appendix 1: Stakeholder Interviews
Appendix 2: Venue Survey Data Tables
Appendix 3: Materials Reviewed
Appendix 4: 2025 City of Calgary Proposed Land Use Table and Definitions
3
Executive Summary
1.
Overview
In 2024, Calgary Arts Development engaged AEA Consulting to prepare an updated strategic
framework that will help ensure that the needs and preferences of Calgarians for cultural
space, policies, granting and other space-related programs are met over the next decade. The
objectives were to:
§Update information on the existing inventory of spaces across Calgary and in the gap
analysis post-pandemic
§Update information on planned capital projects serving Calgary’s creative communities
§Update trends and opportunities to create, renovate, refurbish and sustain a diverse
spectrum of arts and culture spaces
§Critically review progress made on the 2017 Building on our Momentum objectives
§Provide refreshed, data-driven actionable recommendations, outcomes and tactics
regarding infrastructure, policies, granting and other programs over the next decade
Methodology
AEA Consulting’s scope of work was delivered over two phases:
§Phase I: Current State Analysis including an evidence-based assessment of the
infrastructure strategies, relevant policies and outcomes achieved over the last two
decades of unprecedented investment in Calgary’s arts, culture and creative spaces
§Phase II: Action Framework including strategy workshops with stakeholders, framework
development and drafting of the Final Report
Key activities to deliver the scope included:
§Gathered and reviewed a broad spectrum of sector research, strategies and engagement
outcomes supported by Calgary Arts Development and other relevant Civic Partners
since 2008 to capture significant demand trends for space across the sector
§Compiled research and consolidated multiple data sources on creative spaces to generate
an updated asset inventory across the city (allowing longitudinal tracking from 2016, 2020
and 2024), mapped using a contemporary typology of spaces supporting the sector
§Reviewed Municipal, Provincial and Federal policies and programs related to creative
spaces with a focus on the funding ecosystem for operating venues and capital projects;
urban planning and real estate development contexts; and key municipal policy frameworks
§Interviewed stakeholders identified by Calgary Arts Development including arts
organizations seeking space or managing existing facilities; relevant municipal departments;
government funders and foundations; as well as equity-deserving community
representatives
§Undertook various site visits of creative facilities across Calgary
§Designed and analyzed an online survey of cultural space operators
§Compiled research on ‘good practice’ supports deployed in other North American cities
§Prepared a gaps and opportunities analysis and gathered feedback from key municipal
departments and stakeholders
§Prepared recommended strategies and actions through a final report
Scope of work and methodology
5
Key findings
6
Geography of
Creative
Spaces
§
Approximately1,800 creative spaces exist across the city, representing a diversity and depth across the spectrum of space typologies.
Over 54% of the inventory is
located within the Centre area of the city with heavy concentrations of both consumption and production spaces. Commercial training facilities (e.g. performing and visual
arts schools) and Community/Civic venues are the most distributed across the city.
§
15% of the cultural spaces mapped for this study are located in Calgary’s historic buildings
, representing a creative footprint in over ¼ of the total 870 buildings
identified in Heritage Calgary’s Inventory of Evaluated Historic Resources.
Financial
Recovery
§
Calgary has experienced multiple, major crises over the last two decades, impacting the sector’s financial health.
212 cultural spaces have been lost since 2016 and
another 79 have had to relocate. Commercial – Occasional Venues and Commercial – Training Facilities (Dance , Theatre , Music) have faced the most volatility.
§
Cultural spaces face substantial operating pressures.
Over 2/3 of consumption focused venues in the cohort illustrate financial operating profiles that are at medium to
high risk of insolvency (4-5 years of negative net margins). Production focused spaces and smaller budget venues illustrate more positive financial profiles.
§
There is a growing gap between profitable and unprofitable venues, reflecting similar trends seen in recent national research.
Bottom 25% in median operating surplus
for organizations was -4.9% in 2019 and -6.9% in 2023, indicating venues who were operating with deficits heading into the pande
mic tended to slip into deeper deficit. Top
75% in median operating surplus for organizations was 6.3% in 2019 and improved to 9.3% in 2023, indicating venues operating in the top percentile tended to improve
their financial outlooks.
§
Self sufficiency has declined across most facility types since 2019 - earned revenue has yet to recover to 2019 levels for many venue organizations.
Median earned
income for the cohort’s Live Performance Spaces declined by -13.0% annually, Presentation Spaces by -8.2% annually, and Mid-Sized and Large Spaces by -24.5% annually.
Small Budget Spaces and Production/Rehearsal Spaces have shown better resiliency, increasing their median earned revenue annually by 4.1% and 12.9% respectively.
§
Most venues have increased their reliance on public funding as a share of total revenue for operations
. Presentation and Small Budget Spaces have the highest ratio at
approximately 50%. Production/Rehearsal Spaces, Live Performance and Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces rely less on public funding, ranging from 37-42% of total
revenue.
§
The overall amount of public revenue has grown since 2019, but the composition has shifted as the Federal pandemic emergency investment wave has receded
from its peak in 2021
. Median public investment to consumption spaces and Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces has grown between 3.9% and 9.0% annually, however
production spaces and Small Sized Budget have declined slightly between -0.4% and -0.8%. Pandemic highs of 55-65% Federal share have generally reduced by
approximately 20%. Municipal investment as a % of total public funds has generally increased post-pandemic.
Key findings
7
Funding Context
for Venues
§
Operating support to venues through multi-year grant funding from the Province and Canada Council is losing ground to inflation.
During the same period, Calgary
Arts Development
grant funding to venue-based organizations has increased.
§
Long term trends indicate total individual donation levels are growing in Calgary but concentrating in fewer individuals, with the % of total tax filers who are donors
declining to a 25 year low.
Only 17% of Calgarians donate and it is estimated that only 9% of donors nationally give to arts and culture causes.
§
Corporate giving and sponsorships has declined and become more competitive
. Median corporate revenue across all budget sizes has declined with the largest budget
organizations dropping by -20% annually.
Operating
Expenses
§
Facility related expenses make up a significant proportion of operating spaces, indicating an increasing vulnerability to cost pressures.
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
(59%) and Community/Civic Spaces (63%) reported the highest operating expense burdens where facility costs were over 40% of total operating expenses.
Approximately ½ of all spaces reported venue operating expenses had ‘significantly increased’ since before the pandemic.
§
Venue organizations face significant and diverse operational hurdles.
Increased venue costs (77%) was reported as being the most pressing challenge, worsened by both
labour cost escalation (53%) and technical staff availability (23%) – on the revenue size, lower attendance/use levels (37%) and overall decline in net revenue (26%) are
reported as key issues as well as reporting declines in public sector operating support (34%). Utilities and Maintenance/Repair Costs were reported by18-20% of the
venues as the categories with the highest escalation (over 20% increase from pre-pandemic)
Venue
Utilization
§
Cultural production and Exhibition/Gallery spaces are reported to be facing significant capacity constraints.
Artist Studio -
Low Impact shows the most severe capacity
constraints, with 92% of spaces at full/exceeding capacity. Office/Desk Space and Creation/Production Space demonstrates significant pressure with 84% and 80%
respectively of spaces at full/exceeding capacity. Exhibition spaces show the highest reported pressure with 97% of spaces at full/exceeding capacity.
§
Cultural consumption spaces supporting the performing arts reveal some contrasts in space capacity.
65% of Theatre/Concert Hall spaces and 36% of Black
Box/Studio Theatres are reported as full/exceeding capacity. Rehearsal Space maintains the most flexibility with 72% of spaces underutilized and regularly have availability,
suggesting a misalignment (appropriateness, timing, price, location, etc.) between the excess supply and unmet demand indicated from sources such as bi-annual Arts
Professional Surveys.
§
The prevalence of waiting lists are an indicator of growing capacity issues in the ecosystem.
Artist Studios and Creation/Production Space show overwhelming demand
with 87% and 80% of venues having always/occasional waiting lists. Despite there being unused capacity in Black Box/Studio Theatres, 82% are reporting always/occasional
waiting lists, perhaps indicating demand for similar production windows and seasons. Exhibition and Gallery Spaces and Screening Rooms/Auditoriums show strong
demand with over 2/3 of venues reporting always/occasional waiting lists.
Key findings
8
Infrastructure
Quality
§
Infrastructure-related challenges and deferred maintenance are pervasive.
Technology upgrades (56%), accessibility improvements (34%) and deferred maintenance
(45%) are reported as key financial pressures for venue organizations - 53% having difficulty in securing capital funding. Physical Accessibility Features and Environmental
Controls for assembly spaces shows the poorest quality ratings at 42% and 23% respectively.
§
Venues anticipate making significant capital expenditures in the next 5-10 years.
The largest share of venues planning significant capital expenditures are by Presentation
(33%) and Live Performance (28%) spaces with over ¼ of Production/Rehearsal Spaces and Community/Civic Spaces planning moderate upgrades. Maintenance, physical
accessibility and amenities upgrades are the top focuses of capital expenditures anticipated.
Stability of
Tenure/
Ownership
§
Venue organizations are highly vulnerable due to low levels of proper ty owner ship.
Lease/License arrangements dominate at 73% of venues with only 27% owned by
their operators. 31% of leased buildings/spaces are controlled by private owners, indicating high levels of risk for potential d
isplacement. Over 1/3 of spaces are leased from
the City of Calgary.
§
Lease tenures for venues are predominantly short-term, creating instability.
Production/Rehearsal spaces show increased vulnerability with 1/3 of venues on lease
periods under 2 years, including the highest rate of month-to-month leases (13%) across the cohort. Live Performance venues show slightly better stability, with 13% on
very short terms – however 40% have leases less than 5 years. Small Budget venues have a substantially greater vulnerability with 61% of leases under 5 years.
§
Venue organizations repor t a track record of displacement.
Production/Rehearsal venues demonstrate significant displacement with 27% having leased more than 3
previous buildings – all categories show at least 20% of organizations having leased 3 or more buildings previously.
§
Recent lease changes/threats indicate precarity ahead.
Live Performance venues face the highest immediate threat with 53% reporting recent changes/threats to leases,
with 13% expecting no renewal in the next 2 years. Production/Rehearsal and Presentation venues show 40% reporting recent change
s/threats to their lease with 27% and
20% respectively expecting no renewal in 2-5 years
Proposed framework for action
9
Retain and
strengthen
existing venues
§
Advocate to maintain the existing municipal property tax exemption policies for facilities operated/owned by non-profit arts and cultural organizations
§
Increase multi-year operating funding (adjusted to inflation) to venue-based organizations that, in addition to delivering valuable public and/or artistic programming,
provide affordable and accessible space for the benefit of the broader professional arts and cultural sector
§
Pilot a targeted facility operating grant that allocates funding to non-profit space operators with the primary purpose of delivering subsidized, affordable access to
production space for multiple artists and cultural organizations
§
Clarify municipal sector development lead for the music industry and explore opportunities to support recovery, stabilization and growth of small-scale live music
venues (e.g. property tax relief, streamlining of permits/licenses and support for securing space ownership)
Build cross
-
sector capacity
to advance
projects
§
Engage with ‘pipeline’ cultural project proponents to assess up-to-date development status, fundraising objectives/performance and overall project readiness to
enable alignment with tri-level government coordination of capital investment opportunities
§
Prepare a business case for multi-year program funding to support an expanded capacity building program for planning and develop
ing a broader spectrum of social
purpose real estate projects (e.g. United Way community hubs, non-profit housing developers, cooperatives, etc.)
§
Pilot a matching fundraising assistance program that supports new resources required for the planning, organization and implementation of non-profit cultural space
construction and renovation
Resource
internal
advocacy,
stewardship
and delivery
§
Provide updated data trends analysis on cultural venues and community space needs through citizen and arts professional surveys; CADA’s multi-year operating
grant data analysis; and annual reporting to council and the community
§
Clarify outcomes, partnerships and roles in advocating, enabling and delivering equitable access to a diversity of affordable cultural spaces across the city in the
revised Civic Arts Policy and Cultural Plan
§
Review and clarify the municipal roles and responsibilities to steward, partner and/or operate City-owned cultural facilities in the existing and future recreation
centre portfolio
§
Resource an expanded cultural planning unit within City Administration to provide internal coordination and capacity support for
the advancement and stewardship
of community-driven cultural space projects
Proposed framework for action
10
(cont’d)
§
Prepare cultural space design guidelines as a supplement to the updated zoning bylaw and Local Area Plans to support the property sector, cultural proponents and
City business units in stewarding appropriate and high quality cultural spaces
§
Capture and communicate open data on municipal cultural infrastructure use (e.g. cultural event usage of parks; community leases of City-owned sites; cultural pop-
up and interim use relaxations tracking; triple bottom line Return on Investment) through the preparation of a more transparent, accountable and integrated public
data framework across City business units
Improve
access to
capital project
funding and
affordable
financing
§
Prepare a renewed capital grant program framework for non-profit organizations which outlines relevant policy, specific sources, adjudication process and
accountability requirements to support ongoing and emerging capital project needs of the small to medium-sized cultural sector
§
Explore opportunities for a collective action fund among social finance providers to support low-cost, flexible financing to advance the purchase, preservation,
renewal and development of cultural space
§
Advocate for an expanded Established Area Investment Fund program and future redevelopment levies to support delivery of cultural space priorities identified in
Local Area Plans
§
Explore policy amendments and risk management approaches to leverage underutilized municipal finance tools for supporting community-driven capital projects,
including access to municipal loan guarantees and reduction of development permit fees
Shape cultural
space provision
through local
area planning
§
Prepare a process map that identifies clear and consistent criteria, required internal resources and engagement pathways for ide
ntifying and embedding priorities for
cultural space in Local Area Plans
§
Expand opportunities through the new City Plan and zoning bylaw process to broaden development and operating partnerships with cultural organizations
permissible on community association sites
§
Resource a dedicated cultural planning unit within Planning or Partnerships to provide appropriate engagement, policy direction
and project coordination to support
the proposed sequencing of Local Area Plans
§
Develop a pilot cultural district investment program to support implementation of the Chinatown Cultural Plan and identify other potential district opportunities in
equity deserving communities
§
Monitor the impacts of the updated zoning bylaw (once approved) on creative space typologies, including the interface with licensing and building code, to ensure
the objectives of flexibility and tolerance of use are achieved
Proposed framework for action
11
Integrate
culture into
new social
infrastructure
§
Review the current operating models of cultural spaces in City-managed recreation centres to identify internal/external operating partner model(s) for potential
cultural components within future integrated facilities
§
Advocate to City Council for capital funding allocations to deliver significant, multi-functional cultural space through development of new and redeveloped
recreation centres (e.g. Forest Lawn Civic Centre)
§
Support the expansion of artist studio residency opportunities in City-owned facilities and Civic Partner sites
§
Pilot a matching funds program available to community associations for conversion and enhancement of spaces appropriate for live performing arts and all-ages
concerts (e.g. technology improvements, staging, acoustic treatments)
§
Maximize strategic opportunities with Calgary Public Library to invest in creative media and production facilities (e.g. podcast rooms, music recording studios, digital
creation work stations) in new approved library projects
§
Ensure opportunities for enhanced, event-ready infrastructure in park development, redevelopment and management are prioritized in the Parks Infrastructure
Strategic Plan to support the requirements of major events and live performance
Centre the
needs of
artist
communities
§
Audit online cultural space mapping and brokering platforms and improve their functionality to more effectively connect space supply and demand
§
Consider amending policies related to community use of city-owned properties to prioritize ‘nominal’ rents (ie operating costs only, versus the current policy of “up
to” 50% of market rates currently stipulated) for interim use and short-term leases and licenses to nonprofit organizations
§
Resource consistent and robust cultural space research, engagement and advocacy through existing bi-annual artist survey methodology and annual grant reporting
data tracking and analysis
§
Prepare an audit of existing underutilized, pre-development and surplus City-owned sites that illustrate potential for interim c
ultural and community use and provide
public access to site information on the current and in-development opportunities
§
Research the current market demand for artists’ live-work space and undertake a preliminary feasibility assessment for advancing potential models of development
§
Explore opportunities for partnership with affordable housing development entities (e.g. brokering, co-development, master leasing) to facilitate the delivery of
affordable live-work artist housing projects
§
Prioritize and support the delivery of at least100,000 sq.ft. of affordable production and rehear sal space through new, repurposed or expanded City, nonprofit and
private space over the next ten years
Proposed framework for action
12
Scale and
amplify
social purpose
real estate
models
§
Resource the programmatic and geographic expansion of the meanwhile space program currently operated by cSPACE in the Greater Downtown
§
Expand the typology of cultural consumption and production uses eligible to participate in the Downtown Calgary Development Incentive Program (beyond
‘Performing Arts Centre’) to support adaptive reuse of underutilized commercial assets
§
Clarify roles, responsibilities and processes for identifying, specifying and securing cultural amenity space delivered through density bonus agreements with the
property sector
§
Prepare an audit of private and City-owned heritage properties within the Greater Downtown Area (bonusable districts with sufficient development pressure) that
are underutilized; illustrate potential for adaptive reuse as cultural facilities; and/or have transferable density rights
§
Explore policy amendments for directing City-owned surplus land disposition to cSPACE and other non-profit entities that advance the development or
preservation of long-term affordable cultural space
Strategy, Investment and Policy Context
2.
Enduring cultural space investment objectives
In AEA’s review of Calgary’s last two decades of strategy development related to cultural
spaces, a range of common goals are consistently surfaced. These shared ‘drivers’ of policy and
strategy have been expressed through Calgary Arts Development’s successive work over the
years (and generally supported in principle through adjacent civic partner and City
departmental strategies*).
Shared goals for community building
* Primary agencies include Calgary Economic Development; Tourism Calgary; City of Calgary Arts and Culture, Recreation, Parks, Planning and Development 14
§
Supporting the viability and sustainability of existing facilities for cultural activities
, while
improving access for broader segments of the ecosystem (e.g. small arts organizations,
ethno-cultural communities and artist collectives)
§
Growing the cultural sector and creative industries
, with a focus on suppor ting greater
levels of collaboration and crossover to drive economic development and tourism
§
Conserving Calgary’s built, natural and Indigenous heritage
, including a focus on adaptive
reuse of historic buildings for cultural purposes
§
Enhancing Calgary’s capacity to host large-scale arts and cultural gatherings year-round
,
with a focus on investing in adequately sized, event-ready outdoor infrastructure
§
Ensuring that Calgary’s cultural spaces can meet the needs of its growing and diverse
communities
, par ticular ly in relation to under ser ved geographic areas of the city
§
Fostering Calgary’s pluralism of cultural expressions by centering equity, diversity and
inclusion when investing in new infrastructure
, par ticular ly in suppor t of the
advancement of self-determined Indigenous cultural spaces
§
Reinforcing and amplifying the Greater Downtown as the cultural heart of the city
, with
a focus on enhancing the cluster of anchor cultural facilities and activating the public spaces
that connect them
§
Retaining and nurturing creative talent within the city
, with an intentional focus on
improving opportunities for new and emerging artists through affordable access to
housing and a rich diversity of rehearsal/creation facilities
Though the priorities are articulated with varying emphasis depending on the sectoral focus
(e.g. community development, creative industries, tourism, etc.) or municipal agency alignment,
they generally describe outcomes related to the following:
‘Archetypes’ as a lens for shaping strategy
First articulated in the 2008 Arts Spaces Strategy and Capital Plan and reinforced as a lens for
strategy in the subsequent 2017 Building On Our Momentum report, Calgary Arts
Development’s sector research and priorities for cultural space investment have been relatively
consistent over time. Broadly focused on supporting the advancement of projects across four
space typologies or ‘archetypes’, they include:
•Developing Calgary’s downtown and inner-city neighbourhoods as the signature ‘cultural
cluster’ for the city
•
Archetype I Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces
- centrally located, large-scale facilities that function
as flagships, iconic landmarks and destinations for consumption by locals/visitors
•
Archetype 2 Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces
– centrally located small-to-medium scale
projects that are stable, affordable and accessible for a broad array of cultural production uses
•Developing more ‘complete’ communities with access to dedicated arts spaces
•
Archetype 3 Major Community Arts Centres
– suburban, large-scale arts spaces that are
responsive to community/regional priorities while supporting a diversity of users
•
Archetype 4 Small Community Arts Centres
– a suburban network of small-scale arts spaces
that support more intensive and high-quality arts activities in existing civic assets
As a generalized framework illustrated in Figure 1, the four archetypes are most usefully
conceived as a high-level matrix of cultural space priorities related to the intersection of ‘place’
(centralized/dispersed geography) and primary cultural ‘mode’ (consumption/production) in
shaping strategy over the last two decades.
Strategic context overview
Sources: 2008 Arts Spaces Strategy and Capital Plan, Calgary Arts Development; 2017 Building On Our Momentum, Calgary Arts Development 15
CULTURAL
PRODUCTION
CULTURAL
CONSUMPTION
CENTRALIZED
DISPERSED
Archetype 1
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces
Archetype 2
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces
Archetype 3
Major Community Arts Centres
Archetype 4
Small Community Arts Centres
FIGURE 1 Matrix of Space ‘Archetypes’
For consistency, AEA has applied this ‘lens’ in a review of sector research initiatives and partner
strategy documents prepared since 2008 to identify infrastructure priorities that have been
articulated over time (see Figure 2 on the next page). These are assessed against the flow of
capital investment to projects that have been realized to reveal potential gaps between
strategy and delivery.
Strategic context overview
CENTRALIZEDDISPERSED
FIGURE 2 Research and Strategy Matrix – Cultural Space Priorities 2008-2024
16
2007/8 Art Spaces
Strategy &
Capital
Plan (n=350)
2010 CADA Space
Market Analysis
(n=211)
2013 Calgary Cultural
Facility Inventory –
Supplementary
Analysis Report
2014 Living a Creative
Life &
Tactical Plan
2016 Calgary Cultural
Plan / 2016-
2018
Implementation Plan
2017 Building On Our
Momentum –
Arts
&
Culture Infrastructure
2017 -
2023 CAD Arts
Professional Surveys
2020 Arts
&
Culture
Needs Assessment in
Downtown Calgary
(NWT RFP Process)
2021/22
CreativeCity
Ecosystem Report
&
Engagement Summary
2021 Performing Arts
Lodge YYC Report –
The Way Forward
2021Calgary’s Greater
Downtown Plan
2022 Chinatown
Cultural Plan
2022/24 Beltline Area
Redevelopment Plans
Parts 1 & 2
2022 Concentration of
Artists in Canada
(n=286)
2022
Eventful City
Strategy
2022 Calgary Creative
Congress –
Creative
Spaces Breakout
2023 Creative Space:
Information Gathering
Session Report (n=24)
2021-
24 West
Anthem Music City
Strategy
Survey
(n=187
)
2022-
24 cSPACE
Demand Survey
(n=137)
2024 DRAFT
Recreation
GamePLAN for
Facilities
2024 Resonant
Energies: A Music City
Strategy For Calgary
Archetype 1 – Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces
(centrally located, large-scale facilities that function as flagships, iconic landmarks and destinations for consumption by locals/visitors)
• Cultural anchor renewal
• Mid-sized theatre (800-2,000)
• Outdoor festival/event spaces
• Mid-sized music/performance hall
• Major contemporary art gallery
Archetype 2 – Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces
(centrally located small-to-medium scale projects that are stable, affordable, and accessible for non-profit arts production uses)
• Artist studios – industrial & ‘clean’
• Shared creative workspace
• Affordable live/work
• Rehearsal space
• Production workshop
• Media production studio
• Small exhibition space
• Small performance venues
• All-ages arts space
• Multi-tenant cultural hub
• Indigenous gathering place
Archetype 3 – Major Community Arts Centres
(suburban, large scale arts spaces that are responsive to community/regional priorities while supporting a diversity of users)
• Mid-sized performing arts centre
• Outdoor festival/event spaces
• Integrated recreation/cultural hubs
Archetype 4 – Small Community Arts Centres
(a suburban network of small-scale arts spaces that support more intensive and high quality arts activities in existing assets)
• Multi-functional community centre
• Small performance venues
• Multi-tenant cultural hub
• All-ages arts space
• Outdoor festival/event spaces
An unprecedented investment in anchor cultural spaces
The allocation of approximately $165 million to capital projects made available by City Council
starting in 2008 through the Cultural Municipal Sustainability Initiative (CMSI) program was an
unparalleled and catalytic investment that, by the time currently funded projects are realized in
2028, will have been a major component of generating approximately $2.05 billion in
enhanced facilities for Calgarians:
§Over nearly two decades of the program’s rollout, CMSI funds were leveraged across 17
projects - undertaken by the City of Calgary, post-secondary institutions and non-profit
organizations, this investment wave generated 5.77x the program investment (including
other municipal capital funding sources)
§Seven major projects absorbed over 75% of the available CMSI funding with an average
$18 million allocation - when fully realized physically and programmatically, this scale of
investment has the potential to be transformational through a portfolio of reimagined
legacy cultural anchors, such as Glenbow Museum and Arts Commons, as well as new
capacities delivered through the National Music Centre, Contemporary Calgary, Bella
Concert Hall, Calgary Film Centre and enhancements to the Calgary Zoo
§The remaining ten projects were successful in securing an average of $4 million, building
in-demand capacity for small performing arts venues; museum/gallery/archive space; and
shared workspaces and studios - final CMSI allocations were deployed in 2023/24 to
projects that were ’shovel ready’, before the program was concluded by the Province
In addition to CMSI-funded projects, AEA compiled data for 45 additional capital projects,
including design/construction, major renovations and upgraded technology funded by
Provincial and/or Federal programs.
Investment pattern of capital projects
Sources: Organization news releases and websites; City of Calgary Council Reports; Calgary Foundation annual reports; Government of Alberta grant recipient database; Government of Canada grant recipient database; AEA stakeholder interviews 17
FIGURE 3 Capital Project Public Investment by ‘Archetype’ 2008 - 2028
The value of projects related to each ‘archetype’ are summarized in Figure 4 - the total
portfolio of 62 projects that have been completed or advanced since 2008 indicate
heavy weighting of public investment towards central anchor projects:
§16 - Archetype 1 Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces (86.5% of total public funds)
§29 - Archetype 2 Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces (5.2% of total public funds)
§9 - Archetype 3 Major Community Arts Centres (7.2% of total public funds)
§6 - Archetype 4 Small Community Arts Centres (0.3% of total public funds)
§2 - Other, not aligning with any archetype (0.9% of total public funds)
On the following two pages, capital projects are illustrated by total size and scale of
public investment in Figure 4; seating capacity added specific to the por tfolio of
performing arts spaces is illustrated in Figure 5.
ARCHETYPE 2 (29)
67M
ARCHETYPE 3 (9)
94M
ARCHETYPE 1 (16)
1,122M
ARCHETYPE 4 (6)
4M
N/A (2)
WERKLUND CENTRE -PHASE 1
WERKLUND CENTRE -PHASE 2
CALGARY CENTRAL LIBRARY
NATIONAL MUSIC CENTRE
GLENBOW MUSEUM
TELUS SPARK -BUILD
CONTEMPORARY CALGARY -PHASE 3
BELLA CONCERT HALL -MRU
OLYMPIC PLAZA TRANSFORMATION
HANGAR FLIGHT MUSEUM -NEW BUILDING
NICKLE GALLERIES -UofC
TELUS SPARK -UPDATE PHASE I & 2
SAM CENTRE -CALGARY STAMPEDE
CSPACE MARDA LOOP
CALGARY ZOO -CANADA WILDS
CONTEMPORARY CALGARY -PHASES 1 & 2
CANADA SPORTS HALL OF FAME
CALGARY FILM CENTRE
NATIONAL ACCESSARTS CENTRE
DJD DANCE CENTRE
NWT BUILDING AND
HISTORIC FIRE HALL 1
CALGARY ZOO -CHINA
ARTS COMMONS -NEW TECH
FOLK FESTIVAL HALL
THE CONFLUENCE -NEW MUSEUM
HERITAGE PARK -INTERPRETIVE CENTRE
ATCO PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE
PUMPHOUSE THEATRES
DOHERTY HALL -CALGARY STAMPEDE
INDIGENOUS GATHERING PLACE
BEDDINGTON THEATRE ARTS CENTRE
BMO THEATRE -YMCA
EVAN HAZELL THEATRE -YMCA
NORTH MT PLEASANT ARTS CENTRE
CIVIC ART COLLECTION FACILITY
MCHUGH HOUSE
THEATRE CALGARY
THE GRAND
MILITARY MUSEUMS
ALBERTA BALLET SCHOOL
LOUGHEED HOUSE
LA CITE DES ROCHEUSES
EVERGREEN THEATRE
QUICKDRAW ANIMATION STUDIOS
ART GALLERY OF CALGARY
WEST VILLAGE THEATRE
TRICKSTER THEATRE
ALLIANCE FRANCAISE OF CALGARY
SPRINGBOARD -CONTAINR
ANTYX COMMUNITY ARTS SOCIETY
THE NEW GALLERY
WORDFEST -MEMORIAL PARK LIBRARY
EMMEDIA GALLERY & PRODUCTION STUDIOS
GREEN FOOLS THEATRE -STUDIO G
ALEXANDRA WRITERS' CENTRE
STORYBOOK THEATRE
PURE ENERGY DANCE STUDIO
FREED ARTIST SOCIETY
VALOUR CANADA
0
10 M
20 M
30 M
40 M
50 M
60 M
70 M
80 M
90 M
10 0M
11 0M
12 0M
13 0M
14 0M
15 0M
16 0M
17 0M
18 0M
19 0M
20 0M
21 0M
22 0M
23 0M
24 0M
25 0M
26 0M
27 0M
28 0M
29 0M
30 0M
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Calgary’s ‘arc’ of creative space investment
Total Estimated Capital Project Cost
Sources: Organization news releases and websites; City of Calgary Council Reports; Calgary Foundation annual reports; Province of Alberta grant recipient database; Government of Canada grant recipient database; AEA stakeholder interviews
FIGURE 4 Publicly Funded Capital Projects 2008 – 2028 (Budgeted)
18
Bubble size: Total Public Funding Confirmed ($10M)
Non-CMSI Funded Capital Project
CMSI Funded Capital Project
Significant capacity added in live performance spaces
Sources: Organization news releases and websites; City of Calgary Council Reports; Calgary Foundation annual reports; Government of Alberta grant recipient database; Government of Canada grant recipient database; AEA stakeholder interviews 19
Jubilee Auditorium
Arts Commons, Jack Singer Concert Hall
Arts Commons, Theatre (Future)
Arts Commons, Max Bell Theatre
Arts Commons, Martha Cohen Theatre
Polaris Centre for the Performing Arts
The Grand, Flanagan Theatre
Vertigo Theatre, Playhouse
Pumphouse Theatre, Victor Michell Theatre
Evan Hazell Theatre, YMCA
DJD Dance Centre, Theatre
BMO Theatre, YMCA
Pumphouse Theatre, Joyce Doolittle Theatre
Arts Commons, Studio Theatre (Future)
La Cite des Rocheuses, Theatre
Loose Moose Theatre
Arts Commons, Engineered Air Theatre
Beddington Theatre Arts Centre, Theatre
Calgary Opera, Mamdani Centre
Arts Commons, Big Secret Theatre
West Village Theatre
cSPACE Marda Loop, Studio Theatre
Vertigo Theatre, The Studio
Lunchbox Theatre, Theatre
Theatre 1308
The Grand, Studio Theatre
Arts Commons, Motel
The Palace Theatre
U of C, MacEwan Hall A & B
Calgary Stampede, BMO Amphitheatre
National Music Centre, Performance Hall
Festival Hall
National Music Centre, King Eddy
Calgary Stampede, Doherty Hall
MRU, Bella Concert Hall
U of C, University Theatre
Webber Academy, Performing Arts Theatre
U of C, Eckhardt-Gramatté Hall
MRU, Leacock Theatre
MRU, TransCanada Amphitheatre
MRU, Wright Theatre
U of C, Reeve Theatre
U of C, Boris Roubakine Recital Hall
MRU, Nickle Theatre
Globe Cinema, Cinema One
Globe Cinema, Cinema Two
The Plaza Theatre
Central Library, Patricia A. Whelan Performance Hall
Contemporary Calgary, Auditorium
Glenbow Museum, Auditorium (Future)
TELUS Spark, Inspiration Stage
Cardel Theatre
Contemporary Calgary, Dome
The Military Museums, CP Rail Theatre
The Confluence, Burnswest Theatre
Wordfest, Event Space
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
2600
Funded Future Project
Capital Project Completed Since 2008
Live Music VenuesPerforming Arts Theatres Performing Arts Theatres
(Academic)
Auditoriums/Screening Rooms
McMahon Stadium 35,650
Max Bell Centre 20,000
Scotia Place 18,400
Big Four Roadhouse 4,000
WinSport Event Centre 3,700
Grey Eagle Event Centre 2,952
The Palace Theatre 1,250
U of C MacEwan Hall 1,000
FIGURE 5 Performance Spaces Completed and/or Currently Budgeted by # of Seats 2008 - 2028
Based on publicly available data, AEA has compiled the major government funding sources for the 62
projects (Figures 6 – 8) include completed and/or in-development projects). The scale, focus and value
of projects are diverse, ranging from design/construction activity, to major renovation and technology
upgrades. No standard government funding ratio is discernable, however most projects over $1
million involve at least two levels of public partnerships. The differential between these public funds
and the total cost estimates compiled through various sources is assumed to be a leveraged mix of
private philanthropy, corporate sponsorship and/or debt financing. Limited data on non-public/own-
source funds inevitably contributed by organizations for most of the smaller renovation projects were
not publicly available and therefore may not included in the total estimated project value.
§Most of the 27 projects
under $1 million
were ‘incubator’ spaces with a focus on technology and
equipment enhancements to small, existing performing arts venues; the median value of public
funding for these types of projects was approximately $120,000
§In the next tier of 13 investments
between $1–10 million
, over 3/4 were City-owned sites
(including the early site exploration costs for the proposed Indigenous Gathering Place); the
median public funding value in this tier was $3.1 million
§Nearly 3/4 of the 11 projects
between $10-50 million
are City-owned facilities – included in this
tier is the estimated budget of the Historic Fire Hall 1 and North-West Travellers building; the
median public funding value was $30.2 million
§Many of the 11 largest projects
over $50 million -
predominantly City-owned Civic Partner
facilities and post-secondary sites - leveraged matching contributions from tri-level government
partners, attracting a median of $160 million in public funds from both established capital funding
programs and one-time allocations
Capital project funding: major sources
Sources: Organization news releases and websites; City of Calgary Council Reports; Calgary Foundation annual reports; Government of Alberta grant recipient database; Government of Canada grant recipient database; Stakeholder interviews 20
FIGURE 6 Median Value of Public Funding for Capital Projects by Tier
FIGURE 7 Public Capital Funding for Creative Spaces by Source 2008 - 2024
Public Funding Source Total Funds % of Total
Canada Community Revitalization Fund 0.8M 0.1%
Canada Cultural Spaces Fund 32.0M 2.5%
Infrastructure Canada 264.0M 20.9%
City of Calgary - Cultural MSI 163.3M 12.9%
City of Calgary - Civic Partners Capital Funding 10.2M 0.8%
City of Calgary - Other (e.g. CRL, Downtown Strategy)
525.0M 41.6%
Province - Alberta Jobs Plan 1.9M 0.2%
Province - Community Facility Enhancement Program 13.1M 1.0%
Province - Municipal Stimulus Program 12.2M 1.0%
Province - Other (Treasury) 240.6M 19.0%
Total Public Funds 1263.1M 100%
Value Range # of Projects
Median Value
of Public
% City
Owned
<1M 27 $0.1M 22%
1-10M 13 $3.1M 77%
10-50M 11 $30.2M 73%
>50M 11 $160.0M 64%
Capital project funding: major sources
Sources: Organization news releases and websites; City of Calgary Council Reports; Calgary Foundation annual reports; Government of Alberta grant recipient database; Government of Canada grant recipient database; AEA stakeholder interviews 21
FIGURE 8 Estimated Capital Project Public Investment by Archetype 2008 - 2028
Archetype Project
Total
Public
Funds
Total Cost
Estimate
% Public
Funding
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces WERKLUND CENTRE - PHASE 1 270,000,000 270,000,000 100%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces WERKLUND CENTRE - PHASE 2 73,000,000 270,000,000 27%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces CALGARY CENTRAL LIBRARY 237,944,416 245,000,000 97%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces NATIONAL MUSIC CENTRE 55,000,000 191,000,000 29%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces GLENBOW MUSEUM 128,100,000 180,000,000 71%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces TELUS SPARK - BUILD 120,000,000 160,000,000 75%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces CONTEMPORARY CALGARY - PHASE 3 70,000,000 108,000,000 65%
Major Community Arts Centres BELLA CONCERT HALL - MRU 50,300,000 72,271,019 70%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces OLYMPIC PLAZA TRANSFORMATION 70,000,000 70,000,000 100%
Major Community Arts Centres HANGAR FLIGHT MUSEUM - NEW BUILDING 4,851,198 60,000,000 8%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces NICKLE GALLERIES - UofC 3,234,000 50,500,000 6%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces TELUS SPARK - UPDATE PHASE I & 2 18,329,427 45,000,000 41%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces SAM CENTRE - CALGARY STAMPEDE 9,860,051 44,000,000 22%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces CSPACE MARDA LOOP 14,139,405 34,514,405 41%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces CALGARY ZOO - CANADA WILDS 27,200,000 31,500,000 86%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces CONTEMPORARY CALGARY - PHASES 1 & 2 25,549,000 31,422,001 81%
Major Community Arts Centres CANADA SPORTS HALL OF FAME 30,168,503 30,168,503 100%
Other CALGARY FILM CENTRE 10,000,000 28,200,000 35%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces NATIONAL ACCESSARTS CENTRE 12,723,913 20,112,750 63%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces DJD DANCE CENTRE 8,597,500 19,350,000 44%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces NWT BUILDING AND HISTORIC FIRE HALL 1 5,000,000 20,000,000 25%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces CALGARY ZOO - TREASURES OF CHINA 10,370,210 16,000,000 65%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces ARTS COMMONS - NEW TECH 8,435,956 8,435,956 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces FOLK FESTIVAL HALL 4,817,447 5,200,000 93%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces THE CONFLUENCE - NEW MUSEUM 4,500,000 5,000,000 90%
Major Community Arts Centres HERITAGE PARK - INTERPRETIVE CENTRE 2,577,280 3,943,200 65%
Small Community Arts Centres ATCO PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE 1,071,816 3,871,816 28%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces PUMPHOUSE THEATRES 3,862,386 3,862,386 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces DOHERTY HALL - CALGARY STAMPEDE 1,635,344 3,100,000 53%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces INDIGENOUS GATHERING PLACE 3,000,000 3,000,000 100%
Small Community Arts Centres BEDDINGTON THEATRE ARTS CENTRE 574,068 2,949,068 19%
Archetype Project
Total
Public
Funds
Total Cost
Estimate
% Public
Funding
Major Community Arts Centres BMO THEATRE - YMCA 2,500,000 2,500,000 100%
Major Community Arts Centres EVAN HAZELL THEATRE - YMCA 2,500,000 2,500,000 100%
Small Community Arts Centres NORTH MT PLEASANT ARTS CENTRE 2,100,000 2,100,000 100%
Other CIVIC ART COLLECTION FACILITY 1,200,000 1,200,000 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces MCHUGH HOUSE 850,000 850,000 100%
Cultural Cluster Anchor Spaces THEATRE CALGARY 757,586 757,586 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces THE GRAND 592,220 592,220 100%
Major Community Arts Centres MILITARY MUSEUMS 521,774 521,774 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces ALBERTA BALLET SCHOOL 301,609 301,609 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces LOUGHEED HOUSE 272,975 272,975 100%
Major Community Arts Centres LA CITE DES ROCHEUSES 237,233 237,233 100%
Small Community Arts Centres EVERGREEN THEATRE 208,569 208,569 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces QUICKDRAW ANIMATION STUDIOS 198,564 198,564 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces ART GALLERY OF CALGARY 166,469 166,469 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces WEST VILLAGE THEATRE 148,515 148,515 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces TRICKSTER THEATRE 135,732 135,732 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces ALLIANCE FRANCAISE OF CALGARY 125,000 125,000 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces SPRINGBOARD - CONTAINR 119,647 119,647 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces ANTYX COMMUNITY ARTS SOCIETY 87,600 87,600 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces THE NEW GALLERY 80,750 80,750 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces WORDFEST - MEMORIAL PARK LIBRARY 77,482 77,482 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces
EMMEDIA GALLERY & PRODUCTION STUDIOS
35,036 35,036 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces GREEN FOOLS THEATRE - STUDIO G 34,180 34,180 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces ALEXANDRA WRITERS' CENTRE 27,586 27,586 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces STORYBOOK THEATRE 23,887 23,887 100%
Small Community Arts Centres PURE ENERGY DANCE STUDIO 23,493 23,493 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces FREED ARTIST SOCIETY 22,200 22,200 100%
Major Community Arts Centres VALOUR CANADA 12,078 12,078 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces INSIDE OUT THEATRE 12,000 12,000 100%
Small Community Arts Centres WHEAT POOL GRAIN MUSEUM SOCIETY 10,000 10,000 100%
Cultural Cluster Incubator Spaces NEW BLACK MUSIC AND ARTS CENTRE 5,000 5,000 100%
Totals 1298.2M 2049.8M
City of Calgary
§
Cultural Municipal Sustainability Initiative (CMSI)
§Initiated in 2008, Council allocated $165 million (approximately 5% of total Provincial MSI capital
funding) to 17 culture-related projects determined by their level of ‘readiness’ and deployed at the
rate that the Province allocated in its multi-year capital budgets
§The program was terminated by the Province in 2023/24 after the remaining $15.5 million in
CMSI funds were redirected to Glenbow Museum and The Confluence
§
Local Government Fiscal Framework (LGFF)
§Replaces the MSI program as the Province’s primary funding mechanism for capital funding to
Calgary - there is no Council-dedicated allocation for cultural spaces similar to MSI
§Non-profits are eligible for funding via the City for arts and cultural infrastructure, including
cultural or community centres; performing arts facilities, museums/art galleries and designated
local heritage sites
§
Community Revitalization Levy (CRL)
§Allows for the education portion of the incremental property tax in a designated redevelopment
district to be dedicated to investment programs in a specified area - projects only within the
boundaries of the The Rivers District currently benefit from this type of capital financing
§Investments to date including Olympic Plaza, Arts Commons and Calgary Event Centre; public art
throughout the district has been partially funded through CRL
§
Municipal Stimulus Program
§A one-time component of Alberta’s Recovery Plan to help with the impacts of COVID-19,
providing partial funding to projects like Glenbow Museum and Arts Commons; the program is
no longer available
Capital project funding: major sources
Sources: Rivers District Community Revitalization Plan Extension January 2019; 2021 Reprioritization of Cultural Municipal Sustainability Initiative Budget Funds (PFC2021-0779); 2023 Local Government Fiscal Framework Capital Program
Guidelines - Municipal Affairs; 2016 Cultural Municipal Sustainability Initiative (CMSI) Program Council Report (CPS2016-0297); 2021 Greater Downtown Plan – Initial Investment and Approvals Council Report (C2021-0524); Revised Downtown
Development Incentive Program Terms of Reference (EC2024-0800) 22
§
Community Capital Conservation Grant
§Community association facilities (City-owned) can apply for funding allocations for facility life cycle
plans, consultant reports and capital conservation/life cycle projects
§
Downtown Strategy Fund
§Allocations from the City and Federal infrastructure funds to support implementation of Calgary’s
Greater Downtown Plan, including incentives for office building conversion (with ground floor
incentives for only performing arts spaces) and capital contributions to Stephen Avenue, Arts
Commons and Olympic Plaza
§
Off-site Development Levies
§Levies paid by developers are one of the tools used to help fund social infrastructure in
established and new communities
§Levies are collected as land development proceeds, generating resources over time to fund
population-based, growth-related infrastructure projects such as libraries, parks and recreation
centres
§
Civic Partners Capital Fund
§A targeted capital fund for Civic Partner facilities only to support lifecycle improvements to City-
owned properties, requested through annual departmental Service Plans and Budgets
Calgary Foundation
§Impact Investments
§The Foundation provides debt financing to Calgary charities and non-profit organizations to
augment investments from traditional financial institutions or provides investments to
organizations with credit capacity but who are unable to secure financing; cultural space projects
supported include cSPACE, DJD Dance Centre, Youth Singers and Contemporary Calgary
§Major Grants Program
§Provides grants to support single or multi-year, large-scale initiatives with transformational impact -
included contributions to Calgary Opera Community Arts Centre, DJD Dance Centre and
Contemporary Calgary’s Observatory and Auditorium renovation
Province of Alberta
§Community Facility Enhancement Program (CFEP)
§A funding program from the Province designed to support non-profit organizations in their efforts
to renew, expand, purchase or construct public-use community facilities - the program includes
both ‘Small’ (up to $125,000) and ‘Large’ (up to $1 million) funding streams, eligible for a broad
range of cultural infrastructure such as community hubs, parks, museums, libraries, theatres,
galleries and performance spaces; larger requests over $1 million require Treasury commitments
§The program has contributed to a range of feasibility studies, equipment upgrades and
construction projects for cultural spaces across Calgary including cSPACE Marda Loop, National
accessArts Centre and ATCO Performing Arts Centre
§Alberta Jobs Plan
§Emerging from the 2015 economic challenges, the Province deployed an infrastructure program
to help stimulate the economy, generate jobs and address the infrastructure deficit - the Calgary
Zoo’s exhibit, Treasures of China, received funding from this program
Capital project funding: major sources
Sources: 2024 Community Facility Enhancement Program Program Guidelines – Province of Alberta; 2022 Green and Inclusive Community Buildings Applicant Guide; 2024 Major Grants Guidelines and Impact Investing Guidelines – Calgary
Foundation; housing-infrastructure.canada.ca/plan/icp-pic-INFC-eng.html 23
Government of Canada
§Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program
§Provides funding to infrastructure projects across Canada to improve the quality of life in
communities - the program focuses on four main streams: public transit; green infrastructure;,
community, culture and recreation infrastructure; and rural and northern communities’
infrastructure
§Projects funded through the program included Heritage Park; TELUS Spark; Glenbow Museum;
National Music Centre; Mount Royal University Conservatory and Performance Hall; and Canada
Sports Hall of Fame
§Canada Cultural Spaces Fund
§A national fund managed by Canadian Heritage that supports the improvement of physical
conditions for arts, heritage, culture and creative innovation – the program has funded a broad
range of Calgary’s cultural space investments including renovation and construction projects; the
acquisition of specialized equipment; and feasibility studies
§Projects funded through the program included Folk Festival Hall, Doherty Hall, SAM Centre, Arts
Commons and cSPACE Marda Loop – smaller upgrades included ContainR, EMMEDIA, Evergreen
Theatre and Lougheed House
§Canada Community Revitalization Fund
§Administered through PrairiesCan, the short-term fund was established to help communities
across Canada build and improve community infrastructure projects, supporting recovery from
the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic
§Improvements to Contemporary Calgary were funded through this time-limited program
Inflation outpacing existing Provincial and Federal multi-year grant funding
As with many arts and cultural organizations delivering programs and services across Calgary,
venue-based non-profits rely in part on a range of multi-year operating grants from public
funders. Based on AEA’s research and interviews, the most prevalent are Canada Council for
the Arts (CCA), Alberta Foundation for the Arts (AFA) and Calgary Arts Development.
Though not formally a stable, multi-year grant source, the Alberta Gaming and Liquor
Corporation (AGLC) has delivered successive (or bi-annual) grants to many of Calgary’s non-
profit venues and has been included in the analysis.
While not specifically dedicated to supporting the unique operating cost environments of
venues (including their role in supporting the broader sector with subsidized rentals), these
grant programs are flexible enough to have eligible portions of facility operating expenses
covered:
§
Canada Council for the Arts
§From 2020 to 2024, overall funding from the CCA to Calgary-based individual artists,
groups/collectives and organizations grew by 1.9% annually (CAGR*, adjusted for inflation) – from
$8.5 million in 2020 to $9.1million in 2024
§While the total level of funding to Calgary has kept pace with inflation overall, grants specifically
allocated to arts organizations declined by 0.1% annually over the five-year period
§Representing over half of the total CCA funding in 2024 ($4.8 million), the Core Grants program
provides recurring, multi-year operational funding to a range of non-profit organizations
§Approximately 60% of those organizations funded through the Core Grants program are venue-
based, including many of the small to mid-sized theatre, dance and music performance spaces
(n=14), as well as presenting organizations in media, literature and visual arts (n=9)
Operating grant funding: major sources
* CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate is the average annual growth over a specific period, effectively smoothing out short-term fluctuations to provide a clearer picture of long-term trends
Sources: 2019-2023 Grantee Financial Reporting Data, Calgary Arts Development; canadacouncil.ca/about/public-accountability/proactive-disclosure/grant-recipients/recipients-2017-present 24
§Figure 9 illustrates a decline of -1.6% annually in funding to the 23 venue-based organizations in
Calgary over five years, adjusted for inflation – in 2024, total funding was $2.9 million
§Visual and Media Arts organization funding has declined at a higher rate of -2.5% annually,
compared to Performing Arts at -1.3% annually
§Median funding amounts in 2024 are also below pre-pandemic levels, declining -1.8% annually
§As part of the government-wide ‘Refocusing Government Spending’ initiative announced by the
Government of Canada in 2023, the Council has plans to reduce its spending incrementally over
the next three years
$0.0M
$1.0M
$2.0M
$3.0M
$4.0M
20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23 20 24
Performing Arts
Visual and Media Arts
FIGURE 9 Canada Council for the Arts – Operating Funding to Venue-Based Organizations (CAGR, Inflation Adjusted)
2020 - 2024
§
Alberta Foundation for the Arts
§From 2020 to 2024, overall funding from the AFA to Calgary-based individual artists,
groups/collectives and organizations declined by -5.8% annually (CAGR, adjusted for inflation) – a
decrease from $12.0 million to $9.5 million; grants specifically allocated to arts organizations
declined by -6.5% annually over the five-year period
§AFA’s Organization Operating Grant program provides multi-year operational funding to a range
of non-profit organizations, representing nearly 80% of the total AFA funding to Calgary in 2024
($7.5 million)
§Approximately 30% of those organizations funded through the program are venue-based,
including many of the small to mid-sized theatre, dance and music performance spaces (n=26) in
Calgary, as well as presenting organizations in media, literature and visual arts (n=16)
§Figure 10 illustrates a decline of -6.6% annually in funding to the 41 venue-based organizations in
Calgary over five years
§Performing Ar ts organization funding has declined at a higher rate at -6.7% annually, compared to
Visual and Media Arts at -5.9% annually
§Median grant amounts in 2024 are also below pre-pandemic levels, declining -8.5% annually
§In the Province’s 2024 Budget, an18% funding increase was allocated to the AFA with further
commitments to 2026-27 - while the increase allowed the AFA to restore some grant programs
to pre-pandemic levels, individual artists has been identified as a strategic priority, maintaining
current levels of multi-year operating grants to arts organizations
Operating grant funding: major sources
Sources: www.affta.ab.ca/news/afa-2024-25-annual-budget; open.alberta.ca/opendata/funding-recipients; https://www.affta.ab.ca/news/news-release-millions-grant-funding-albertas-art-sector 25
FIGURE 10 Alberta Foundation for the Arts – Operating Funding to Venue-Based Organizations (CAGR, Inflation Adjusted)
2020 - 2024
$0.0M
$1.0M
$2.0M
$3.0M
$4.0M
20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23 20 24
Performing Arts
Visual and Media Arts
§
Calgary Arts Development
§From 2019 to 2023, overall funding through Calgary Arts Development’s Operating Grant
Program to organizations grew by 26.5% annually (CAGR, inflation adjusted) – from $3.4 million
to $8.6 million; funds are committed on a multi-year cycle and may be directed to any area of an
organization’s overall budget
§Approximately 31% of those organizations funded through the program are venue-based,
including many of the small to mid-sized theatre, dance and music performance spaces (n=29) in
Calgary, as well as presenting and support organizations in media, literature and visual arts (n=20)
§Figure 11 illustrates funding increases of 25.7% annually for Performing Arts and nearly 50%
annually for Visual and Media Arts organizations who are venue-based
§
Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis (AGLC)
§Through a range of gaming revenue sources (e.g. casino, bingo, raffle and pull ticket events), AGLC
distributes funding for program-related activities (and in some cases, leasehold improvements) to
charitable arts organizations in Calgary who operate venues
§Though not delivered as a stable multi-year funding program, many venue-based organizations
have successfully attracted successive or repeated funding contributions through AGLC - in 2024,
$2.4 million was allocated to these arts organizations (n=29)
§Figure 12 illustrates total funding to Performing Arts organizations has grown by 5.5% annually
compared to Visual and Media Arts at 2.7% annually (CAGR, inflation adjusted)
§Median grant amounts in 2024 are slightly higher than pre-pandemic levels, increasing by 0.3%
annually
§In 2025, AGLC will be increasing the limit for facility renovations from $50,000 to $100,000
Operating grant funding: major sources
Sources: 2019-2023 Grantee Financial Reporting Data, Calgary Arts Development; aglc.ca/gaming/charitablegaming/who-benefits; News Release – “Less red tape, more freedoms for Alberta’s charities”, March10, 2025, Government of Alberta 26
FIGURE 11 Calgary Arts Development – Operating Funding to Venue-Based Organizations (CAGR, Inflation Adjusted)
2019 - 2023
$0.0M
$1.0M
$2.0M
$3.0M
$4.0M
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Performing Arts
Visual and Media Arts
$0.0M
$1.0M
$2.0M
$3.0M
$4.0M
20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23 20 24
Performing Arts
Visual and Media
Arts
FIGURE 12 Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis – Operating Funding to Venue-Based Organizations (CAGR, Inflation Adjusted)
2020 - 2024
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Calgary
Alberta
Canada
$ 0
$ 1,000
$ 2,000
$ 3,000
$ 4,000
$ 5,000
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Calgary
Alberta
Canada
$0.0B
$0.2B
$0.4B
$0.6B
$0.8B
$1.0B
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Calgary
Less donors overall but many Calgarians are giving larger amounts
Individual philanthropy has been a considerable source of funds for realizing cultural capital
projects in Calgary, though there are some discernable macro trends in charitable giving that
broadly indicate challenges and opportunities to enabling future capital projects:
§The value of total charitable donations (Figure 13) has increased substantially over the past
25 years in Calgary – in 2022, charitable donations were 142% higher than in 1997
(adjusted for inflation); more recently following the financial crisis of 2008, total value of
donations has increased by 22%, double the growth province-wide; the value of donations
from Calgarians in 2022 was $826 million, nearly reaching a 2015 peak of $828 million
§The average donation amount per Calgary tax filer (Figure 14) has grown by 111% since
1997 (adjusted for inflation), outpacing Alberta (84%) and Canada (71%) over the same
time period
§The overall number of tax filers from Calgary claiming a charitable donation grew by 131%
from 1997 (17% since 2008), however the percentage of total tax filers who donate
(Figure 15) has been in decline for many years - currently, only 17% of tax filers in the city
donate, a low point of the last 25 years
Although the Province has recently increased the donation tax-credit on the first $200 to 60%
as an incentive to small donors, raising philanthropic funds for capital projects remains highly
competitive. According to a survey of 1,203 Canadians by CanadaHelps, about 9% of donors
give to arts and culture causes in a given year (9th among 10 different “cause areas” captured
in the survey). A 2022 survey of 1,000 Calgarians also indicated the top three reasons for not
making charitable contributions to cultural organizations that year – income changes (41%),
other causes have greater impact (34%) and lack of personal connection as a cause (30%).
Individual charitable donation trends
Sources: Canadian Taxfiler Data Table: 11-10-0130-01, Statscan; Statistical Insights on the Arts – May 2024, Hill Strategies; The Giving Report 2024, CanadaHelps and Environics Analytics; 2022 Citizen Engagement Survey, Stone-Olufson 27
FIGURE 13 Total Donations by Tax Filers ($Billions) - Adjusted for Inflation 1997 - 2022
FIGURE 14 Average Donations Among Donors - Adjusted for Inflation 1997 - 2022
FIGURE 15 % Donors of Total Tax Filers 1997 - 2022
Limited growth and increased competition in corporate donation and sponsorship levels
In addition to the challenge of declining individual donation levels in Calgary over the long
term, the sector has also faced limited growth in corporate sponsorships and donations, as
reported in annual financial data by Calgary Arts Development’s operating grant recipients
(n=183 in 2023):
§Figure 16 and Figure 17 use the following budget groupings to show differences in small,
mid-sized and large organizations
§A-B (Up to $100,000)
§C-D ($100,001 - $500,000)
§E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000)
§G ($3,000,001 and over)
§Figure 16 illustrates the total corporate revenue (adjusted for inflation, CAGR) reported
by organizations, categorized into four major budget groups
§Both categories of Small Budget organizations have shown a decline in corporate giving since
2019 (A-B Under $100,000 has declined by -9.9% and C-D $100,001 to $500,000 has reduced
by -2.8%)
§Mid-Sized to Large Budget organizations have faired better (E-F $500,001 to $3 million has grown
by 8.9% and G Over $3 million has only declined by -1.8%
§Median corporate revenue across all budget sizes has declined (adjusted for inflation,
CAGR) with the largest budget organizations dropping by -20%; the data is indicative of a
few organizations attracting a large share of the corporate donation and sponsorship
revenue while average organizations have reported declines
Corporate donation and sponsorship trends
Source:s: Calgary Arts Development 2019-2023 Grantee Financial Reporting Data 28
FIGURE 16 CADA Grantees: Total Corporate Revenue and 5 Yr Growth (CAGR, Inflation Adjusted) by Budget Group 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 17 CADA Grantees: Median Corporate Revenue and 5 Yr Growth (CAGR, Inflation Adjusted) by Budget Group 2019 - 2023
A-B (-9.9%)
C-D (-2.8%)
E-F (8.9%)
G (-1.8%)
$0.0M
$0.5M
$1.0M
$1.5M
$2.0M
$2.5M
$3.0M
$3.5M
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
A-B (-3.6%)
C-D (-4.1%)
E-F (-8.5%)
G (-20%)
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Review of enabling policies for cultural spaces
Sources: EC2024-0956 Non-Profit Tax Mitigation Policy, City of Calgary; AEA interview with cSPACE Director of Space Development; CD2024-1202 Tax Exemption Bylaw for Non-Profit Non-Market Housing, City of Calgary; 2024
Canadian Property Tax Rate Benchmark Report, Altus Group; EC2023-1040 Report to Executive Committee, City of Calgary
* Eau Claire & Bow historic building was not intended for demolition – it has been relocated from its temporary site to a new permanent location
Non-Profit Tax Mitigation Policy
Non-profit and charitable organizations operating facilities that provide public benefit are
generally exempt from property tax in Calgary through the Municipal Government Act (MGA)
and the Community Organization Property Tax Exemption Regulation (COPTER). Exemptions
under these mechanisms substantively reduce the operating cost burden (estimated between
$2.50/sq. ft. for industrial spaces to $5.50/sq. ft. for office spaces) on many arts and cultural
venues (in 2022, $42 million in property tax value was exempted to all non-profit/charitable
uses). Tax exemption for commercial buildings partnering with cSPACE’s ‘meanwhile’ use
program (SPACEPILOT activates vacant commercial spaces with non-profit arts uses) has also
incentivized the take-up from private owners to participate in the program (property tax
reduction accrues to the landowner in a leasehold situation, allowing for the provision of
below-market rates to tenants on triple-net leases). The key criteria for exemption relevant to
culture uses include:
§The facility must be owned and used by a qualifying non-profit organization
§The facility must be primarily used for cultural purposes at least 60% of the time it is in use
§The use of the property must not be restricted
§Exemption for affordable housing developments applies to the residential portions of the
property only
In Calgary, the issue of a non-profit cultural facility paying taxes while under construction or
renovation (i.e. not in ‘active’ public use) has been resolved with the City of Calgary's Non-Profit
Tax Mitigation Policy which applies exemption up to four years from the building permit stage
to qualifying non-profit organizations.
Lease Policy for Non-Profits in City-Owned Buildings Intended for Future Demolition
Cultural organizations operating and activating City-owned facilities or sites is a relatively
common partnership model in Calgary. Most of the cultural Civic Partners, Alberta Ballet
Company, CommunityWise Resource Centre and the Calgary Film Centre are examples of
organizations who have long-term land leases or licenses of occupation with the City’s Real
Estate and Development Services (REDS) group.
Adjacent to those longer term agreements, REDS works with non-profit organizations to
access affordable space (up to 50% of market value rent) on an interim basis while ensuring
that the City can use the land for its intended municipal purpose in the future (such as
transportation projects, affordable housing, corporate functions, etc.). Depending on the
context, ‘interim’ can be a matter of weeks or months or can extend past ten years or longer.
While many leases are managed through a formal advertising process (with a focus on
receiving market rents and minimizing holding costs), REDS has worked to facilitate ad-hoc
requests from internal City departments and Ward Councilors to accommodate a range of
cultural non-profits on City-owned land. A significant challenge for cultural adaptive reuse
(even temporary) of building assets intended for demolition is their poor physical quality and
limited site servicing. Intended for demolition, the spaces are provided ‘as-is’ with no capital
funding or improvements committed by the City to bring facilities to code.
Much of the emphasis for REDS has been on unlocking and activating film-friendly spaces and,
in recent years, transitioning sites to accommodate non-market housing partnerships. As a
result, only a few interim leases have been secured for cultural spaces since the Council policy
was approved: Springboard Performance – containR, Artpoint Gallery and Studios, cSPACE
Projects (Eau Claire & Bow River Lumber Co. building*) and nvrlnd. Arts Foundation.
29
Review of enabling policies for cultural spaces
Sources: 2023 Bonus Density Evaluation Results and Next Steps, City of Calgary;2023 Beltline Community Investment Fund Information Session Presentation, City of Calgary; 2020 Overview of Municipal Density Bonusing Policies,
City of Calgary; engage.calgary.ca/citybuilding/cbpphase4
Density Bonus Program
Density bonusing is a voluntary program that allows developers to build greater density on a
property in exchange for providing public amenities to offset the impacts of that density. The
tool has been used in other cities to incentivize partnerships between developers and non-
profits in delivering a range of arts and cultural spaces. Developers can choose to pursue extra
density in exchange for a bonus density contribution or build within the density envelope
allowed in the area's policy plan. Bonus density contributions can include:
§Cash contributions to Community Amenity Funds (e.g. Beltline Investment Fund)
§Construction of public amenities on-site
§Heritage Transfers, where development rights on a heritage property are "transferred" to
another site in the area
Two t y p es o f a r t s a nd c ul t u r al s p a ce s h ave b e en b o nu sa bl e i n t h e G r ea te r D ow n tow n a r e a:
§
Active arts space
is a publicly accessible internal area designed to accommodate creative
activities requiring public access including artist studios, exhibition space, performing arts
space and rehearsal spaces
§
Cultural support space
is an internal space intended for creative activities that do not
require public access such as administration, rehearsal space and storage spaces
In the current draft Calgary Zoning Bylaw under review, these types of spaces have been
included in the revised list of bonused public amenities under ‘Indoor Community Amenity
Space’ (including spaces that serve the cultural, artistic and gathering needs of the community
such as assembly spaces, cultural facilities and artist studios) at 25 year minimum lease terms
for $1.00/sq. ft. annually.
Calgary's bonus density program has proven reasonably successful in the Greater Downtown
area, contributing $117.3M worth of improvements between 2006 and 2019 across 45
projects. These improvements came in the form of developer-constructed public amenities,
heritage transfers and financial contributions invested in public space upgrades through
Community Amenity Funds. Unlike other large Canadian cities, the program has been
ineffective at delivering significant cultural infrastructure, with two exceptions:
§Te lu s Sk y’s c on tr i bu t io n of a me zz a n i n e a r ts s pa c e ( f o ll ow i n g th e de mo l it io n o f A r ts
Central) has remained unactivated as a potential community asset (an apparent outcome
of a lack of formal mechanism or transfer process in place for community use)
§The Bow Tower contribution of ‘cultural’ space, originally intended for the unbuilt south
tower – this informal development agreement was settled after decades of negotiations to
eventually transfer the historic North-West Travellers building to the City
The program has been less effective outside the Greater Downtown area - only 11 projects
have been realized between 2015 and 2019, none of which are for cultural space. Lower
performance is due to a number of factors, including:
§Existing capacity for intensification within the base densities outlined in policy plans, limiting
the need for bonus density
§Extended time it can take to accumulate sufficient funds to provide a public amenity to
offset extra density
§Significant resources required to coordinate programs, which, combined with the lower
number of applications and the time lag in delivering the offset, results in minimal impact
30
Review of enabling policies for cultural spaces
Sources: 2019 Land Use Bylaw Amendment – Enabling Pop-up and Interim Uses, City of Calgary; 2024 Revised Downtown Calgary Development Incentive Program Terms of Reference EC2024-0800 – City of Calgary; Downtown
Calgary Office Conversions – Approved Projects, City of Calgary
Pop-Ups and Interim Use
Responding to high vacancy rates in existing buildings, the City amended the Land Use Bylaw in
2019 to reduce regulatory barriers for businesses operating for a short period in commercial
and industrial spaces city-wide. The objectives of the initiative were to:
§Allow opportunities for new businesses to see if their product/use is successful (both as
product and within a particular community) prior to submission of a formal permit
§Animate areas with different or unique uses that wouldn’t otherwise be allowed for a
short duration of time, thereby minimizing planning impacts
§Filling vacant or hard to occupy spaces
§Allowing markets and similar flex spaces in more areas of the City
Depending on their durations, two categories of relaxations are available:
§
Pop-Up Uses
: these uses have low to moderate impact on surrounding areas and can
activate in a commercial or industrial space for four consecutive days for a total of 50 days
in a calendar year without a development permit (include Artist’s Studio, Cinema, Museum,
Market and Performing Arts Centre)
§
Interim Uses
: these uses have low impact on surrounding areas and can occupy a vacant
commercial space for up to six months without a development permit (including Artist’s
Studio, Office, Retail and Consumer Services)
Granted as relaxations to existing bylaws, there is limited tracking data available from the City
for the volume of take-up or business types (e.g. cultural sector) that have taken advantage of
the initiative.
Downtown Calgary Development Incentive Program
Established in 2021, the program was initiated by the City of Calgary’s Downtown Strategy
group to provide proponents with financial incentives to undertake conversions of existing
commercial office buildings experiencing high levels of vacancy and obsolescence in the
Greater Downtown Plan area.
While eligible uses are focused primarily on residential and hotel use (at a rate of $75/sq. ft.),
incentives for adaptive reuse projects will also be considered for post-secondary, academic
spaces and performing arts centres (though at a lower incentive rate of $50/sq. ft.). While
opening the door for developers and post-secondary institutions to include music, theatre and
dance performance space, the exclusiveness of the incentive opportunity for these types of
assembly uses (vs other cultural amenity spaces that generate footfall, vitality, etc.) narrows
down the potential activation of ground floor spaces to the most complex of typologies to be
physically integrated into mixed use buildings (e.g. separate HVAC, double story volumes,
higher code compliance for assembly, etc.).
11 conversion projects have been approved (as of September 2024) however no performing
arts projects have been identified as either the core use or as an active use proposition at
ground/Plus 15 Level.
31
Review of enabling policies for cultural spaces
Sources: 2017 Investing in Partnerships Policy, City of Calgary; CD2023-0752 Report, City of Calgary
Investing in Partnerships Policy
Under this policy, Civic Partners are organizations that are considered as the City of Calgary’s
most substantial external partners, receiving significant municipal investment (including
operating/capital grants and use of City owned assets such as facilities and land) to generate
value as places for cultural consumption and engagement for citizens. Cultural spaces currently
supported as Civic Partners include:
§Arts Commons
§The Confluence Historic Site and Parklands
§Contemporary Calgary
§Hangar Flight Museum
§Heritage Park Society
§Calgary Zoological Society
§TELUS Spark
§Culture-adjacent organizations (libraries, recreation centres and community associations)
City partnerships operate across a spectrum of categories, sizes and scopes of investment –
most are considered as ‘Program and Service Delivery Partners’. These are independent
organizations that partner with the City to deliver programs and services; operate major City-
owned facilities; or steward land, artifacts or other assets through the management or use of
recreation centres, a nominal lease, or an operating/capital grant over $500,000.
A new Civic Partner Operating Grant Program has been instituted in 2025 that is intended to
provide more accountability for aligning civic outcomes with multi-year operating funding.
32
Corporate Facility Planning and Delivery Policy
Most relevant to this report. the policy sets the context for the development of integrated
facilities such as city-owned recreation centres. Several key goals have been identified and
aligned with the associated Corporate Facility Planning and Delivery Framework:
•Citizen Focused Facilities
•Engage citizens to create spaces and places that work for their communities
•Create publicly accessible indoor spaces and multi-purpose rooms for use by community groups
where needed
•Partner with other levels of government and community groups to enhance the usability of
facilities for citizens
•A Resilient Facility Portfolio
•Generate revenue from leased spaces to fund the operations of community amenities such as
plazas, community rooms, etc.
•Use facilities to reflect the culture of the community and address issues directly impacting the
community
•Complete Communities
•Plan facility sites within the context of the surrounding community to support the aspirations of
updated City planning and cultural documents, both statutory and visionary
•Plan, develop or redevelop City facilities in major community activity centres
•Locate and co-locate City services with other services to diversify the amenities available in
communities
•Consider opportunities to create space for other private or non-profit businesses and services
that are required in the community
•Where possible, include affordable housing in multi-service facilities
Calgary’s Ecosystem of Cultural Spaces
3.
Methodology
AEA has identified, categorized and mapped approximatley1,800 cultural and creative spaces
across the city, representing a diversity and depth across the spectrum of cultural consumption
and production spaces. A framework of space typologies (identified in Figure 18 below) is
designed to capture the breadth of contemporary spaces that support arts, culture and
creativity including purpose-built and adapted; commercial, public and non-profit operated;
centralized and dispersed. The framework has been applied consistently to both spatial as well
as financial analysis throughout the report.
To c o m p l e t e t h i s w o r k a n d p r o v i d e a n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r t r e n d a n a l y s i s , A E A c o m p i l e d , c l e a n e d
and geocoded address-based buildings and spaces generated from the following databases:
§2016 City of Calgary Cultural Plan cultural asset database
§2020 Calgary Arts Development’s Spacefinder website database (final export before
closing)
§2023 West Anthem Music Ecosystem database
§2023 Calgary Arts Development’s grantee programming location reports
§2024 Federation of Calgary Communities facilities database
§2024 Google Maps search and addressing of cultural and creative sector locations in
Calgary
§2024 Province of Alberta registered non-profit organizations database
Business closures and openings indicated in the databases were confirmed through internet-
based research.
Multi-space, multi-tenant facilities such as Arts Commons and cSPACE Marda Loop have been
disaggregated into their major component parts to provide a more nuanced understanding of
their portfolio of community assets. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the mapping of
multi-purpose space within categories of facilities such as conference centres, churches and
community association facilities have been captured more conservatively for their function as
places of assembly and rehearsal, rather than identifying an exhaustive list of individual meeting
rooms (a methodology used in the Spacefinder data).
Various lenses of spatial analysis have been overlaid on the cultural and creative spaces data to
provide the basis for identifying insights, gaps and opportunities, including Heritage Calgary’s
Inventory of Evaluated Historic Resources. In the context of a new draft City Plan and Zoning
Bylaw nearing completion, the inventory of spaces has also been analyzed in relation to the
municipal land uses they operate within to capture the patterns relevant to supporting the
cultural and creative sector. Definitions of the current land use bylaw major groups are
summarized in Figure 20 below and descriptions of relevant draft bylaw groups proposed in the
new City Plan are included in Appendix 4.
Patterns of creative space, place and land use
Sources: Bird Creative; City of Calgary Arts and Culture; AEA Google Map search by relevant sectors (July 2024); Federation of Calgary Communities; open.alberta.ca/opendata/alberta-non-profit-listing; 2023 Calgary Arts Development operating
grantee database 34
Major Group Typology Description
Small-Sized Performance Space (1-400 person) including black box or studio theatre space
Mid-Sized Performance Space (401-1200 person)
Major Performance Space (1201-2500 person)
Arena/Stadium/Events Centre (>2500 person)
Outdoor Amphitheatre/Stage Sites with dedicated permanent outdoor infrastructure (e.g. amphitheatre, outdoor stage)
Major Museum, Archive, or Gallery Spaces used for museum collections, including art museums, history and other specialised museums
Non-Profit Exhibition Space Spaces for exhibition which are used by non-profit organizations, including artist-run centres
Commercial Gallery Spaces for exhibition which are used by for-profit art galleries
Digital Exhibition/Immersive Space Spaces that engage technologies (VR, AR, mixed reality) to create immersive experiences for public audiences
Auditorium/Screening Room Spaces for film screening/presentation/lecture
Commercial - Occasional Venue Cafe/Restaurant/Bar/Nightclub Venues for occasional live music - primary function is not dedicated to presenting/performance
Commercial - Event Space Meeting/Event/Conference Venue Hotels, event centres, and banquet halls identified with ongoing cultural use - primary function is not dedicated to presenting/performance
Park/Plaza Event-intensive public spaces or POPS (Privately Owned, Public Space)
Multipurpose Spaces Facilites owned/managed by non-profit and/or government identified with ongoing cultural use - including sanctuaries, community association, libraries
Makerspace Buildings incorporating communal studio space with shared technical/production facilities
Creative Studios Buildings which provide workspaces either solely for artists or a mixture of artists and other creative industries tenants - not home based
Rehearsal Space, Theatre Publicly bookable space, not including drama, dance, or music schools - vocal, theatre
Rehearsal Space, Dance Publicly bookable space, not including drama, dance, or music schools - sprung floors
Rehearsal Space, Music Publicly bookable space, not including drama, dance, or music school - sound attenuation
Workshop Spaces Spaces that accommodate light industrial practice - including wood, metal, paint/scenic, prop/costume making, ceramics/glass, printmaking
Storage Space Spaces for art storage, sets, costumes, etc. - climate controlled and/or standard
Artist Live-Work Spaces Buildings with dedicated units for artist live-work housing
Sound Recording Studio Spaces which provide a specialised facility for sound recording, mixing and audio production of music
Media Production Studio Spaces which include editing and post production studios - film and TV
Photography Studio Photography studio space accommodating shoots, editing, etc.
Private Office Standard offices which provide independent workspace for multiple creative industries businesses and/or non-profit organizations
Coworking Space Buildings which provide managed, shared workspaces for multiple creative industries businesses and/or non-profit organizations
Commercial - Training Facility Performing/Visual Arts School Private dance, music, theatre, and art schools with limited/no rentable capacity
Creative Office Space
Community/Civic Space
Live Performance Spaces
Presentation Spaces
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
Digital Media Spaces
Typology of spaces
35
FIGURE 18 Framework of Cultural/Creative Space Typologies
CONSUMPTIONPRODUCTION
Inventory of spaces by major grouping
36
55
654
FIGURE 19 Number of Cultural/Creative Spaces by Major Grouping 2024
COMMUNITY /
CIVIC SPACES
§Multipurpose Spaces
§Libraries
§Community association facilities
§Faith institutions
§Cultural centres
DIGITAL MEDIA
SPACES
§Media production
studios
§Photography studios
§Sound recording
studios
COMMERCIAL –
OCCASIONAL VENUES
§Cafés/restaurants
§Bars/nightclubs
CREATIVE OFFICE
SPACES
§Coworking space
§Private office
COMMERCIAL -
TRAINING FACILITIES
§Performing arts school
§Visual art schools
PRESENTATION
SPACES
§Auditorium/screening
rooms
§Exhibition spaces
§Major museums, archives, or
galleries
PRODUCTION/
REHEARSAL
SPACES
§Artist live-work
§Creative studios
§Makerspaces
§Dance, music, and
theatre rehearsal spaces
§Dedicated storage
spaces
§Workshop spaces
LIVE
PERFORMANCE
SPACES
COMMERCIAL –
EVENT SPACES
113
169
177
247
211
56
654
155
Production Focused
Consumption Focused
55
Major Group Examples of Sub-Types Description
Auto-Oriented Commercial Corridor A commercial corridor designation that is primarily for commercial uses along major roadways - residential uses are not allowed
Community Commercial A community commercial designation that is typically for 1 to 2 storey commercial strip malls that primarily serve the immediate surrounding area
Local Commercial A neighbourhood commercial designation that is primarily for small commercial uses in 1 to 2 storey buildings
Mixed Commercial Corridor A commercial corridor designation that is primarily for commercial or mixed use development of varied height - residential units are allowed on upper floors of buildings
Office A commercial designation that is primarily for office buildings near major roadways and public transit facilities
Pedestrian-Oriented Commercial
Corridor
A commercial corridor designation that is primarily for commercial or mixed use development that must include commercial storefronts. Buildings may vary in height -
residential units are allowed on upper floors
Regional Commercial A regional commercial designation that is primarily for large, mostly retail commercial developments where uses are typically in multiple buildings distributed over multiple
sites
Commercial - Core High Rise Office and Mixed Use A commercial/residential designation that is for high-rise, high-density development with a mix of commercial, residential and cultural uses within the Downtown
Direct Control A customized land use designation with a list of allowable uses and a set of rules specific to a particular property or development
Future Urban Development Primarily for lands that are awaiting urban development and is largely limited to uses that can easily be removed to allow for future urban development
General Industrial Primarily for a wide range of general industrial uses
Heavy Industrial Primarily for large, purpose built heavy industrial developments that typically locate close to hazardous goods routes and rail lines
Industrial Interface (I-R) Applied to older industrial areas that were developed before current land use standards were introduced - Alyth, Bonnybrook, Greenview, Manchester, and Skyline
Industrial Interface (I-C) Allows light industrial and limited small-scale commercial uses that are compatible with adjacent industrial areas
Industrial Interface (I-E) Allows a limited range of low impact light industrial uses that are suitable in close proximity to residential areas
Institutional Large Scale Health, Religious, Educational Primarily for large scale culture, worship, education, health and treatment facilities
Community Mixed Use For a mix of commercial and residential uses in mid and high rise buildings in the East Village area
Pedestrian-Oriented Commercial
Corridor
For commercial and residential uses in street-oriented buildings - the district allows both commercial and residential uses at street level
Residential with Limited Commercial For intensive residential development with some support commercial uses in the East Village area
Community Parks and Schools (S-CS) For education and community uses - accommodates a limited range of small scale public recreation facilities, both indoor and outdoor
Community Parks and Schools (S-SPR) For public parks, open space, schools and recreation facilities on land designated as 'reserve land' under the Municipal Government Act
Recreational Area and Facilities Primarily for private recreation facilities, both indoor and outdoor
Recreational Community Rec. with Limited Commercial Intended for public plazas next to the Bow River in the East Village area
Residential - High Density Multi-Residential Primarily for high density multi-residential development
Residential - Low Density Low Density Residential Primarily for single detached, side-by-side and duplex homes - single detached homes may include a secondary suite
Residential - Medium Density Multi-Residential Primarily for townhouses and fourplexes as well as 3 to 5 storey apartment buildings, townhouses and rowhouses
Commercial
Industrial
Mixed Use
Parks, Recreation and Public
Education
Current land uses enabling cultural spaces
Sources: www.calgary.ca/planning/land-use/online-land-use-bylaw.html 37
FIGURE 20 City of Calgary Land Use Bylaw IP2007 - Select Major Group Definitions
Overview
AEA applied a spatial framework of eight community ‘sectors’ defined by
City of Calgary Planning to aggregate cultural/creative space data for
analysis of potential patterns that could influence a refreshed strategy.
Derived from 266 individual neighbourhoods and/or transportation
zones across the city, the ‘sector’ boundaries provide a useful scale of
analysis between the higher level Calgary ‘quadrants’ and the granular
landscape of individual neighbourhoods. The distribution of identified
spaces are summarized below, from highest concentration to lowest:
§Centre – 962 spaces
§South – 208 spaces
§Northwest – 159 spaces
§Northeast – 147 spaces
§West – 109 spaces
§North – 70 spaces
§Southeast – 62 spaces
§East – 60 spaces
The concentration of inventoried spaces located in Calgary’s historic
buildings (15% of the inventory) is an additional macro-pattern of note –
this represents a creative footprint in over ¼ of the total 870 buildings
identified in Heritage Calgary’s Inventory of Evaluated Historic Resources.
Geography of cultural/creative spaces
Sources: City of Calgary (data.calgary.ca/Base-Maps/City-Planning-Sectors/qwju-mqym/about_data);
www.heritagecalgary.ca/explore-inventory; data.calgary.ca/Recreation-and-Culture/Historic-Resource 38
FIGURE 22 Locations of Cultural/Creative Spaces
Centre
54.1%
East
3.4%
North
3.9%
Northeast
8.3%
Northwest
8.9%
South
11.7%
Southeast
3.5%
West
6.1%
FIGURE 21 Locations of Cultural/Creative Spaces
By Community Sector 2024
Why do they matter as places for cultural consumption?
Live performance spaces play a vital role in the cultural and economic
life of cities. They attract local and international talent, drive tourism and
support a range of associated businesses, from hospitality to retail.
Major venues can be economic engines, hosting large events that draw
significant audiences. Smaller and mid-sized venues contribute to the
cultural diversity and financial accessibility to the arts, ensuring that a
wide range of voices and genres are represented in the city’s cultural
offerings.
A well-balanced ecosystem of venues is critical for nurturing artistic
talent across the performing arts spectrum, from music and theater to
dance and improv. Larger venues and arenas such as Jack Singer
Concert Hall, the Jubilee Auditorium and the Saddledome provide
platforms for established artists, allowing them to reach broader
audiences and contribute to the identity and profile of the city. Mid-
sized theatres such as the Bella Concert Hall and the Max Bell Theatre
provide a crucial stepping stone for artists moving up from a broad
range of more intimate venues. Small theatres and alternative spaces
such as West Village Theatre and Pumphouse Theatres are often where
experimental work and new talent are nurtured.
To g e t h e r, t h e s e v e n u e s c r e a t e a r i c h c u l t u r a l l a n d s c a p e , o f f e r i n g
opportunities for artists at various stages of their careers and ensures
that live performance remains accessible and dynamic across all types
and scales.
Live performance spaces
(n=56)
39
FIGURE 24 Locations of Live Performance Spaces
Centre
62.7%
West
15.7%
Northwest
13.7%
Southeast
3.9%
East
2.0%
North
2.0%
South
0.0%
Northeast
0.0%
FIGURE 23 Live Performance Spaces
by Community Sector 2024
Location: Major performance venues, such as theaters and concert halls, are typically located in
central urban areas or recognizable cultural districts, where they are accessible with strong
transportation links and close to hospitality, tourism and retail options to enhance the visitor
experience. Mid-sized and small venues may be found in a wider range of locations, including
mixed-use neighborhoods, entertainment districts and repurposed industrial areas.
Amphitheatres and outdoor stages are often situated in parks, waterfronts or other scenic
areas, providing a unique cultural experience linked to the natural environment. Calgary’s
Prince’s Island Park, Cowboy’s Park, Olympic Plaza, Prairie Winds Park and North Glenmore
Park are examples of these event-intensive outdoor sites.
Land Use Zoning: The operation of live performance spaces requires specific zoning that
allows for public assembly, entertainment and sometimes mixed-use developments. Major
venues like arenas and large theatres often require special zoning districts designed to
accommodate high-capacity events, with infrastructure to manage noise, large crowds and
associated activities – in Calgary’s case, these have been predominantly Institutional and Direct
Control districts. Smaller and mid-sized theatres often benefit from mixed-use zoning, which
supports a blend of performance spaces, dining, retail and residential uses, creating a lively and
integrated urban environment.
Infrastructure and Amenities: Te c h n ic al ly ad v a n c e d pe rf o r m a n c e s p a c e s a re e qu ip p e d w it h
state-of-the-art lighting, sound and stage technology to support complex productions. Major
venues, such as arenas and amphitheatres, offer extensive backstage facilities, large-capacity
seating and advanced audiovisual systems, while mid-sized and small theatres focus on creating
versatile, high-quality environments for a variety of performance types. These spaces often
include back-of-house facilities such as rehearsal rooms, dressing rooms and catering facilities
to support performers and crews as well as front-of-house amenities for audiences such as
café/bars, box office and event space.
Live performance spaces
(n=56)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 40
FIGURE 25 Live Performance Space Locations by Land Use 2024
27%
25%
18%
16%
6%
6%
2%
Institutional
Direct Control
Commercial - Core
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Commercial
Mixed Use
Residential - Medium Density
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Minor Indoor Entertainment
§Major Indoor Entertainment
§Outdoor Entertainment
§Religious Facility
§Special Event
Why do they matter as places for cultural consumption?
Facilities that support arts presentation operate at vastly different scales
and operational environments, from an anchor institution such as
Glenbow Museum to a small artist-run space like Gallery 505 operated
by Calgary Allied Arts Foundation.
Major public museums, archives and galleries serve as key cultural and
educational institutions, preserving and presenting art, history and
knowledge to the public. They offer curated exhibitions, educational
programs and community outreach, playing a critical role in promoting
cultural understanding and engagement with ideas. These spaces often
house permanent collections as well as temporary exhibits, catering to
a broad audience. The growing trend of immersive and digital
exhibitions is helping these institutions reach broader and more diverse
audiences, making art more accessible and relevant in the digital age.
Commercial galleries, small non-profit exhibition spaces and arts-
based screening venues contribute to the local arts ecosystem as
incubators for new talent and are essential as platforms for emerging
and established artists to showcase and sell their work. A shared
characteristic of facilities such as The Bows and New Gallery is their
role as community anchors, providing assembly spaces for cultural
engagement, education and social interaction. They often host public
programs, workshops, lectures and screenings that foster community
participation and exchange.
Presentation spaces
(n=113)
41
FIGURE 27 Locations of Presentation Spaces
Centre
86.3%
Northwest
6.9%
Northeast
2.0%
South
2.0%
West
2.0%
East
1.0%
Southeast
0.0%
North
0.0%
FIGURE 26 Locations of Presentation Spaces
By Community Sector 2024
Location: Major public museums and galleries are typically located in central, prestigious urban
areas, often near other downtown cultural landmarks, government buildings or educational
institutions. Commercial galleries, screening venues and smaller non-profit spaces may be found
in a mix of central and more eclectic neighborhoods including gentrifying or artistically inclined
districts (e.g. Beltline, Kensington, Mission), where they can contribute to and benefit from a
dynamic cultural and commercial scene. Proximity to public transportation, dining and retail
options is often a consideration to enhance visitor accessibility and experience. Manchester
industrial area has also experienced a rise in galleries over the years, due to lower rents; multi-
bay and clear-span building stock; adjacency of industrial uses (picture framing); and
concentration of other creative and lifestyle uses.
Land use zoning
:
The operation of major public museums and archives usually requires zoning
that supports large public assembly, cultural institutions and/or educational use. Museums often
occupy special zoning categories that support these educational and cultural activities while
also allowing accessory retail and hospitality uses to financially support their operations and
provide visitor amenities. Smaller galleries and film screening venues benefit from commercial
or mixed-use zoning that allows for retail and entertainment uses alongside residential or
office spaces. Zoning flexibility ensures that the spaces can accommodate public gatherings,
exhibitions and other cultural activities.
Trends: These multi-functional facilities are increasingly incorporating immersive technology
and digital exhibition capabilities to enhance the visitor experience and engage with new
audiences. Film screening rooms are integrating advanced projection systems and sound
technology to support high-quality cinematic presentations. Additionally, these spaces often
include educational facilities, food/beverage, shops and event spaces to support a wide range
of activities and enhance their role and sustainability as community gathering places.
Presentation spaces
(n=113)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 42
FIGURE 28 Presentation Space Locations by Land Use 2024
24%
15%
15%
15%
12%
10%
6%
3%
1%
1%
Direct Control
Commercial
Commercial - Core
Industrial
Institutional
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Residential - Low Density
Residential - Medium Density
Mixed Use
Residential - High Density
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Minor Indoor Entertainment
§Major Indoor Entertainment
§Indoor Sales and Services
§Industrial
Why do they matter as places for cultural consumption?
Occasional venues for live music - such as cafes, restaurants, bars and
nightclubs - play a crucial role in supporting musicians and the night-
time economy by providing diverse and engaging platforms for live
performances. Alternative venues (e.g. Prairie Emporium, Mikey’s Juke
Joint) offer emerging and established artists opportunities to showcase
their work, build new audiences and gain exposure within their local
communities. They are essential for fostering a vibrant music scene and
nurturing talent across various genres.
A defining characteristic of these venues is their role in helping
musicians build and engage with new audiences. By hosting regular live
music events, open mic nights and themed showcases, these spaces
create opportunities for artists to reach different demographics and
cultivate a loyal following. Additionally, they often promote local talent
and foster a sense of community by encouraging interaction between
musicians and their audiences, contributing to the cultural vibrancy of
the area.
Commercial live music venues dedicated to nurturing emerging talent
(e.g. Ironwood Stage and Grill) also provide a broader supportive
platform for local and up-and-coming artists to perform, offering fair
compensation, flexible booking opportunities and professional support
such as sound engineering, promotion and mentorship.
Commercial occasional venues
(n=211)
Sources: West Anthem Music City Strategy database, Bird Creative 43
FIGURE 30 Locations of Commercial Occasional Venues Spaces
Centre
62.1%
South
10.5%
Northeast
6.3%
West
5.8%
East
5.3%
Northwest
4.2%
Southeast
3.7%
North
2.1%
FIGURE 29 Locations of Commercial Occasional Venues Spaces
by Community Sector 2024
Locations: These venues are typically located in urban areas, entertainment districts and
commercial neighborhoods known for their nightlife and cultural activities. Proximity to other
entertainment options such as theaters, galleries and other music venues is common. They are
often situated in transit-accessible and walkable areas with high foot traffic, making them
accessible to a diverse audience and enhancing their visibility.
Land Use Zoning: Live music venues within cafes, restaurants, bars and nightclubs are generally
found in areas zoned for commercial, mixed-use or entertainment purposes. These zoning
categories allow for a combination of dining, drinking and entertainment activities,
accommodating the unique needs of live music performances while ensuring that the venues
comply with local noise ordinances and other regulations.
Infrastructure and Amenities: These venues are equipped with the necessary infrastructure to
support live music including sound systems, lighting, stages and, in some cases, dedicated spaces
for performances. While the scale and sophistication of the equipment can vary, the focus is on
creating an intimate and engaging atmosphere where artists can connect with their audiences.
Some venues may also offer additional amenities such as seating areas, dance floors and
outdoor spaces to enhance the live music experience as well as artist amenities such as green
rooms.
Commercial occasional venues
(n=211)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 44
48%
20%
16%
10%
3%
2%
1%
1%
Commercial
Direct Control
Industrial
Commercial - Core
Mixed Use
Other Residential
Institutional
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Distillery
§Hotel
§Food and Beverage Services
§Indoor Sales and Services
§Minor Indoor Entertainment
§Major Indoor Entertainment
§Outdoor Entertainment
§Industrial
FIGURE 31 Commercial Occasional Venues Space Locations by Land Use 2024
Why do they matter as places for cultural consumption?
Commercial event spaces - including conference facilities, event
venues and banquet halls - provide flexible and large-scale
environments for hosting art shows, concerts, cultural celebrations and
industry events. As in most cities, Calgary has a broad portfolio of
multi-purpose spaces in hotels, event centres and casinos that serve
domestic and visitor markets for weddings, exhibitions, tradeshows,
meetings and conferences. For the purposes of this study, only venues
that have been identified as regularly supporting arts and cultural
programming have been noted *.
In the Calgary context, banquet halls in the Northeast are central to
hosting cultural events such as weddings, religious festivals and
community gatherings. Communities frequently use these spaces for
weddings which are elaborate, multi-day events involving traditional
ceremonies, music, dance and food. These venues often feature live
performances, including traditional instruments and contemporary
music that resonates with the community’s cultural heritage.
Commercial banquet halls such as Rajveer Banquet Hall and Magnolia
Banquet Hall are more than just event spaces - they are vital cultural
institutions that support diverse communities in preserving and
celebrating their heritage. They provide the physical setting where
culture, tradition and community life intersect, fostering a sense of
belonging and continuity across generations.
Commercial event spaces
(n=55)
*Commercial event spaces identified through reporting on Calgary Arts Development grantee programming locations 45
FIGURE 33 Locations of Commercial Event Spaces
Centre
54.5%
Northeast
29.1%
Northwest
3.6%
South
3.6%
Southeast
3.6%
West
5.5%
South
0.0%
North
0.0%
FIGURE 32 Locations of Commercial Event Spaces
by Community Sector 2024
Locations: These venues are typically located in urban centers, business districts or near major
transportation hubs (e.g. primary transit, airports, regional highways) to maximize accessibility
for attendees. They are often situated in areas with high visibility, parking capacity and foot
traffic; and are close to hotels, restaurants and other amenities that support large events.
Proximity to other cultural and entertainment venues is also common, creating a synergistic
environment that attracts diverse audiences.
Land Use Zoning: Commercial event spaces are generally found in areas zoned for
commercial or mixed-use - zoning categories like Commercial Corridor and Commercial
Community are common, as they allow for a wide range of activities, including large gatherings,
performances and exhibitions, while accommodating the infrastructure needed to support
these large format events.
Infrastructure and Amenities: Many of these venues are equipped with technically advanced
infrastructure including large, flexible spaces that can be adapted for different types of events,
high-quality audiovisual equipment, staging and lighting systems. They often include additional
amenities such as breakout rooms, catering facilities, lounges and parking - all designed to
support the logistical needs of diverse events ranging from corporate conferences to cultural
festivals.
Commercial event spaces
(n=55)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 46
FIGURE 34 Commercial Event Spaces Space Locations by Land Use
2024
29%
27%
24%
11%
7%
2%
Direct Control
Commercial
Commercial - Core
Industrial
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Future Urban Development
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Minor Indoor Entertainment
§Major Indoor Entertainment
§Indoor Sales and Services
§Religious Facility
§Recreational Facility
§Special Event
Why do they matter as places for cultural consumption/production?
Community-based facilities such as libraries, community halls,
churches, public schools and cultural centers are vital for supporting
arts participation and engagement, both as places for consumption and
production. These facilities often provide affordable or even free spaces
for creative activities, making them accessible to local artists,
performers and community groups. Many Calgary churches have
longstanding relationships with choral and classical music groups. Some
community associations have formal leases with arts organizations (e.g.
Morpheus Theater) or are home to regular music concert series (e.g.
Crescent Heights Community Hall). Libraries may offer rooms for
workshops or small performances, while community halls and
recreation centers typically have larger multipurpose rooms suitable for
rehearsals, performances, film screenings or residencies.
A defining characteristic of these facilities is their role as multi-purpose
social infrastructure for a diversity of communities. Newer generation
facilities have invested in technical equipment and high quality spaces,
serving as a bridge between professional and amateur arts practices.
Libraries might host author readings, art exhibits or digital media
workshops, while community halls often hold local theater productions,
dance classes or music performances. By offering space for a wide
range of cultural activities, these facilities foster all ages community
engagement and help build local audiences for the arts.
Community/civic spaces
(n=654)
47
FIGURE 36 Locations of Community/Civic Spaces
Centre
38.4%
South
14.7%
Northwest
14.2%
Northeast
9.7%
West
8.6%
North
6.2%
East
4.5%
Southeast
3.7%
FIGURE 35 Locations of Community/Civic Spaces
by Community Sector 2024
Locations: These facilities are typically located within residential neighborhoods and
community centres – a crucial characteristic as they are intended to serve local populations,
often in areas where formal arts infrastructure may be less prevalent. Proximity to schools,
parks and other community amenities enhances their role as convenient, welcoming spaces for
diverse community members to gather and participate in cultural activities.
Land Use Zoning: These facilities typically operate under zoning classifications that allow for
mixed-use or community-oriented functions, such as public institutional, recreational or special-
purpose zoning. This zoning supports a variety of activities, from public meetings to cultural
events, and allows these spaces to be integrated into the broader urban fabric. The zoning also
often includes provisions that facilitate the use of these spaces for arts and culture, such as
allowing for public performances, exhibitions and educational programming without requiring
special permits. Libraries, community halls and cultural centres often benefit from zoning that
supports a wide range of community services, including arts and cultural programming.
Churches, while primarily religious institutions, also often serve as multi-use spaces within
residential zones, hosting arts events, classes, and performances that contribute to community
life.
Infrastructure and Amenities: These facilities are designed to be flexible and adaptable to a
wide range of activities, from art classes and workshops to performances and exhibitions. They
typically include multi-purpose rooms, auditoriums and spaces that can be configured for
various arts activities. Libraries may offer digital media labs, makerspaces and exhibition areas,
while community halls and cultural centres often have stage facilities, sound systems and spaces
for large gatherings. The infrastructure is generally designed to be accessible and welcoming,
supporting diverse community needs and activities.
Community/civic spaces
(n=654)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 48
60%
10%
9%
5%
5%
3%
3%
2%
1%
1%
1%
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Residential - Low Density
Institutional
Direct Control
Mixed Use
Commercial - Core
Residential - Medium Density
Commercial
Industrial
Other
Residential - High Density
FIGURE 37 Community/Civic Space Locations by Land Use – 2024
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Libraries
§Community Services
§Recreational Facility
§Religious Facility
Why do they matter as places for cultural production?
Facilities that support creative production and rehearsal, including live-
work housing for artists, creative studios, makerspaces, rehearsal
spaces (dance, music and theatre), as well as light industrial workshop
spaces, are essential for the development and execution of a broad
range of creative practice. These production-focused spaces are crucial
for nurturing talent and supporting the development of artistic
projects, providing the physical environments needed for artists,
makers, actors and musicians to experiment, produce and refine their
work before performing or presenting publicly. These spaces also serve
as sites for technical experimentation, where lighting, sound and staging
elements can be tested and adjusted before public performances.
Collaboration has become a defining characteristic of these facilities,
often clustering multiple spaces to foster a sense of community and
cross-pollination among creatives (e.g. cSPACE Marda Loop, FUSE33
Makerspace, Evergreen Community Spaces). Many of these spaces
encourage shared use, with communal areas for networking, socializing
and collaboration as well as shared tools, equipment and materials.
Artist live-work spaces offer the added benefit of combining living
quarters with production areas, supporting the seamless integration of
daily life with creative practice.
Production and rehearsal spaces
(n=155)
49
FIGURE 39 Locations of Production and Rehearsal Spaces
Centre
71.5%
Northeast
10.6%
South
7.3%
East
4.0%
North
3.3%
Southeast
2.0%
Northwest
0.7%
West
0.7%
FIGURE 38 Locations of Production and Rehearsal Spaces
by Community Sector - 2024
7
10
7
8
33
49
9
13
14
9
21
39
15
15
30
10
9
8
75
14
20
16
20
15
12
1
10
2
5
1
1
To s u p p l e m e n t t h e l i m i t e d d a t a f o r i n d i v i d u a l a r t i s t w o r k s p a c e
locations in the inventory, AEA mapped the self-identified Forward
Sortation Area (FSA - 3-digit postal code) locations of existing
workspaces and studios noted by 2023 Arts Professional Survey
participants. Significant clusters of responses are evident in eight
FSAs, collectively representing nearly ½ of all self-identified artistic
space locations across the City.
Production and rehearsal spaces
(n=462)
Sources: 2023 Arts Professionals Survey – Calgary Arts Development 50
FIGURE 41 FSA Locations of Artist Workspaces – 2023 Arts Professional Survey
FIGURE 40 Total # of Self-Identified Locations of
Artist Workspaces by Top FSAs – 2023
(n=462)
T2G
(49)
T2N
(39)
T2E
(33)
T2T
(30)
T2M
(21)
T3B
(20)
T3E
(20)
T3C
(16)
All Other
FSAs
(234)
Location: These spaces are often located in urban areas that are on the edge of gentrification,
within industrial districts or in other areas where real estate is more affordable. Creatives are
drawn to these areas due to their affordability, ease of access and the presence of a supportive
community. These spaces are frequently found in former industrial or commercial buildings that
have been repurposed, offering the large, adaptable spaces needed for rehearsals and studio
work that are conducive to a broad range of creative processes. Calgary’s older Class ‘C’
properties in the Beltline and Downtown West as well as industrial bays in Manchester, Ramsay
and Greenview are examples of affordable areas supporting these uses.
Land Use Zoning: The operation of these spaces typically requires zoning that accommodates
light industrial use, commercial or special artist live-work provisions. Light industrial zoning is
particularly common for makerspaces and workshops, allowing for activities that may involve
machinery, fabrication or other processes while still accessible to main street commercial areas.
Artist studios and live-work spaces may be located in areas zoned for mixed-use that support
a blend of residential, commercial and creative activities, depending on requirements for
soundproofing, operating hours and neighborhood impact.
Infrastructure and Amenities: Rehearsal spaces are typically designed with specific features
tailored to the art form, such as sprung floors and mirrors for dance, soundproofing and
acoustically treated rooms for music, as well as flexible black-box spaces for theater. These
facilities are often modular and adaptable, allowing for different configurations and uses
depending on the needs of the project. Studios, makerspaces and light industrial workshops
are equipped with materials, tools and machinery for fabrication and creative processes. Live-
work housing combines residential amenities with workspace, allowing artists to live and
create in the same environment. Artist studios in particular are increasingly places where
classes, retail and limited public assembly converge.
Production and rehearsal spaces
(n=155)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 51
FIGURE 42 Production and Rehearsal Space Locations by Land Use 2024
38%
21%
19%
9%
4%
4%
4%
1%
1%
Industrial
Commercial
Direct Control
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Commercial - Core
Mixed Use
Residential - Low Density
Residential - High Density
Residential - Medium Density
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Industrial
§Small-Scale Manufacturing
§Indoor Sales and Services
§Minor Indoor Entertainment
§Recreation Facility
Why do they matter as places for cultural production?
These diverse spaces serve as essential assets for the cultural and
creative industries, offering specialized facilities for content creation,
including film, music, photography and other digital media. In addition to
the large sound stages like Rocky Mountain supporting the film and
television industry in Calgary, a broad range of smaller, technically
sophisticated spaces throughout the city are crucial for supporting local
artists, freelancers and small production companies. From film editing
suites and recording studios to photography studios and digital design
workstations, spaces enable creatives to produce high-quality work
without needing extensive in-house resources (e.g. Idle Eyes Collective,
Ghost River Studios and Studio D Recording).
Digital media spaces are often designed with flexibility in mind, allowing
for diverse activities such as photo shoots, recording, filming, editing, and
post-production. Many studios are modular, equipped with cutting-edge
technology, and can be easily adapted to accommodate a wide range of
creative projects, from small-scale photo shoots to large film
productions. This flexibility makes them appealing to a broad spectrum
of users within the creative industries, from freelancers and startups to
established media companies.
Digital media spaces
(n=247)
52
FIGURE 44 Locations of Digital Media Spaces
Centre
63.0%
South
12.8%
Northeast
5.3%
East
4.1%
Northwest
4.1%
Southeast
4.1%
West
4.1%
North
2.5%
FIGURE 43 Locations of Digital Media Spaces
by Community Sector - 2024
Location: These studios are typically located in urban or semi-urban areas that are well-
connected and accessible to creative talent, collaborators and clients. However, advances in
music production technology, high-quality yet affordable recording equipment, and
soundproofing materials, have made it feasible for production to be conducted professionally in
smaller, home-based environments. A trend evident in Calgary, this has reduced the need for
large, specialized commercial spaces and home-based media studios (particularly music
recording) have proliferated in residential areas across the city. Equally, these same technologies
have allowed for integration of sound and post-production studios in community hubs such as
the Central Library and National Music Centre.
The industrial bays and multi-storey heritage buildings throughout the ‘Centre’ community
sector, particularly the central industrial areas (e.g. Manchester, Alyth/Bonnybrook) and Beltline
are highly adaptable for studio conversion. These versatile and spacious layouts can be easily
divided into separate areas for different activities, such as shooting, editing and post-production,
while still allowing room for large equipment, set designs, and collaborative workspaces. Light
industrial areas in Calgary generally offer more affordable rental rates compared to
commercial or retail zones, making them attractive for creatives seeking cost-effective studios.
Land Use Zoning: Digital media spaces are generally found in areas zoned for commercial, light
industrial and mixed-use purposes. These zoning categories allow for a blend of office, retail,
and creative production activities, accommodating the flexible needs of media and creative
industries. Throughout Calgary’s low density residential areas, sound production studios and
other low-impact home-based businesses are becoming more common with technically
sophisticated garage and basement studios.
Digital media spaces
(n=247)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 53
FIGURE 45 Digital Media Spaces Space Locations by Land Use - 2024
23%
22%
19%
13%
7%
7%
7%
2%
Residential - Low Density
Commercial
Industrial
Direct Control
Commercial - Core
Mixed Use
Residential - Medium Density
Residential - High Density
Infrastructure and Amenities: These spaces are equipped with state-of-the-art technology,
soundproof rooms, high-quality lighting, and acoustically treated environments to meet the
technical demands of media production. Additionally, they often include amenities such as
editing suites, control rooms, green rooms, client meeting rooms and collaborative spaces to
enhance the creative process.
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Home Business
§Industrial
§Indoor Sales and Services
§Office
§Library
Why do they matter as places for cultural production?
Creative office spaces, including managed coworking spaces and
clusters of independent private workspaces, suppor t entrepreneur s,
freelancers, and small businesses in many creative fields. Often located
in renovated historic buildings, these spaces have become attractive to
a range of professionals from design, marketing, arts, tech and other
creative sectors due to their distinctive architectural character, large
open floorplans and central location.
Creative coworking spaces often serve as hubs for the intersection of
different creative communities. These buildings tend to offer more
flexibility and customization than standard shared offices. This includes a
variety of workspace options, from hot desks to private studios, as well
as flexible membership models that accommodate the project-based
nature of creative work. Spaces are often designed to be
reconfigurable, allowing members to tailor their environments to
specific needs.
Overall, coworking spaces like cSPACE’s Sandbox, Work Nicer, and
CommunityWise are distinguished by their community-driven approach,
integration with urban culture, tailored amenities, and a philosophy that
prioritizes creativity and collaboration, setting them apart from more
traditional shared office environments. A number of commercial
historic buildings have supported the creative sector consistently over
the years including the Beltline’s Graycon Building and the Grain
Exchange building in Downtown.
Creative office spaces
(n=177)
54
FIGURE 47 Locations of Creative Office Spaces
Centre
75.0%
South
6.3%
Northeast
5.1%
Northwest
5.1%
West
3.4%
North
2.3%
Southeast
2.3%
East
0.6%
FIGURE 46 Locations of Creative Office Spaces
by Community Sector - 2024
Location: These spaces are typically located in urban centers or attractive urban
neighborhoods known for their vibrancy and creative communities. Historic buildings are
particularly sought after for their character and charm, often found in revitalized industrial and
walkable edge districts with a rich cultural heritage and easy access to amenities, public
transportation, and other creative enterprises. Calgary’s Beltline, Inglewood and Ramsay
neighbourhoods exhibit significant clustering.
Land Use Zoning: Creative office spaces are usually situated in areas zoned for commercial,
mixed-use or special purpose districts that support a blend of office, retail and sometimes
residential uses. Historic buildings used for creative offices often benefit from adaptive reuse
zoning policies that incent modern commercial uses while preserving the building’s historic
character.
Infrastructure and Amenities: These coworking spaces typically offer unique amenities that
cater specifically to the needs of creative professionals. This might include photo studios, maker
spaces with fabrication tools, podcasting rooms, design libraries and art studios. In contrast to
standard office solutions which prioritize basic office infrastructure, creative coworking spaces
provide access to resources that enable artistic production, design work and media creation,
making them more suitable for a diverse range of creative activities. Many creative-focused
coworking spaces often activate ground floors to engage with the surrounding community and
contribute to the urban environment with street-facing galleries, retail spaces, cafes or event
venues that showcase the work of members and attract foot traffic. This approach not only
enhances the visibility of the space but also creates a vibrant, interactive interface between the
coworking community and the public.
Creative office spaces
(n=177)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 55
FIGURE 48 Creative Office Space Space Locations by Land Use 2024
28%
24%
11%
10%
10%
8%
4%
3%
2%
1%
Commercial
Direct Control
Industrial
Commercial - Core
Residential - Low Density
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Residential - Medium Density
Mixed Use
Institutional
Residential - High Density
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Home Business
§Office
§Industrial
§Indoor Sales and Services
Why do they matter as places for cultural production?
Facilities that support performing arts schools (e.g. theater, dance,
music) and visual arts schools (e.g. photography, painting) are essential
for nurturing artistic talent and providing specialized education and pre-
professional training, particularly for youth. These spaces offer the
environment and resources needed for students and professionals to
develop their skills, engage in creative expression and prepare for
careers in the arts.
Compared to professional rehearsal facilities, these spaces are typically
equipped with basic technical capabilities sufficient for educational
purposes. For example, dance studios might have sprung floors and
mirrors, art studios will have standard supplies and workstations, and
theater spaces may have simple lighting and sound setups. The focus is
on creating a safe, functional environment for learning rather than high-
end professional production.
Access is primarily restricted to students and staff however public
access is provided for specific events like performances, recitals or
exhibitions. This connection to the broader community enhances the
local cultural fabric of the area and provides students with
opportunities to engage with audiences and develop their professional
skills.
Commercial training facilities
(n=169)
56
FIGURE 50 Locations of Commercial Training Facility Spaces
Centre
32.7%
South
22.0%
Northwest
14.3%
Northeast
10.1%
West
7.7%
North
6.0%
Southeast
6.0%
East
1.2%
FIGURE 49 Locations of Commercial Training Facility Spaces
by Community Sector 2024
Location: Yo u t h a r t s e d u c a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s - including dance, theater, and visual art schools - are
typically located in areas that balance ease of access, community needs and the specific spatial
requirements of each discipline. These facilities are distributed broadly throughout suburban or
inner-city districts with a strong focus on family-oriented communities. These areas tend to
have a stable population with a demand for extracurricular activities for children.
Dance and theatre schools require large, open spaces with high ceilings to accommodate
dance floors, mirrors and flexible spaces for staging and technical setups. These facilities may be
in repurposed commercial or industrial spaces that can offer the necessary square footage and
dedicated parking/drop-off capacity required by student families. In suburban areas, dance
schools might occupy standalone buildings or be part of larger community centers. Visual art
schools often occupy retail frontage commercial buildings with open layouts that can be
adapted for different types of art-making, including drawing, painting, sculpture and digital arts.
Land Use Zoning: Facilities for performing and visual arts schools are usually found in areas
zoned for commercial or light industrial, with some located in mixed-use or special purpose
zones that accommodate a mix of operations. These zoning categories allow for the specific
requirements of arts education, such as performance spaces, studios and exhibition areas.
Infrastructure and Amenities: These facilities are equipped with specialized infrastructure to
support arts education, including dance studios with sprung floors, music practice rooms with
soundproofing, visual arts studios with appropriate lighting and ventilation, and performance
spaces for student showcases. Additionally, they often include spaces for presentation and
group rehearsal, such as multipurpose rooms, galleries and lounges.
Commercial training facilities
(n=169)
Sources: City of Calgary Draft Zoning Bylaw Use Matrix June 2024; City of Calgary Open Data on Land Use Bylaw 1P2007 57
FIGURE 51 Commercial Training Facilities Space Locations by Land Use 2024
38%
18%
18%
10%
7%
3%
2%
2%
1%
Commercial
Direct Control
Industrial
Parks, Recreation and Public Education
Residential - Low Density
Residential - Medium Density
Institutional
Other
Mixed Use
Potentially Relevant
2025 Zoning Bylaw Categories (Draft):
§Indoor Sales and Services
§Recreational Facility
§Industrial
SOUTH SOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHEAST
NORTHWEST
CENTRE
EAST
NORTH
38% of cultural spaces are within a 10-15 minute walk of a CTrain Station
§Consumption-focused venues have the highest level of access to light rail connections
with over ½ of the venues located within a walkable distance of a station; production-
focused and multi-purpose facilities have lower levels of service
§The future addition of the Green Line would add walkability to10% more of the
current inventory, particularly in the central industrial areas
Accessibility to Calgary’s Light Rail Transit
58
FIGURE 53 Location of Spaces Within 800m of LRT Stations (Current and Future)
FIGURE 52 Cultural Spaces Located within 800m of Current and Future CTrain Stations - % of Category 2024
63%
60%
53%
49%
41%
38%
33%
30%
28%
9%
12%
4%
13%
13%
7%
15%
7%
15%
Live Performance Spaces
Presentation Spaces
Commercial - Event Space
Creative Office Space
Commercial - Occasional Venue
Digital Media Spaces
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
Community/Civic Space
Commercial - Training Facility
Current CTrain Future Green Line
The Challenging Financial Landscape
4.
Indicators of growing instability – displacement and closures (212 spaces lost)
Calgary's arts, cultural and creative sector has endured multiple, major crises over the past
two decades: the 2007 - 2009 global financial crisis, the devastating flood of 2013, the 2014 -
2017 energy sector downturn, the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 – 2022 and the current
cost-of-living crisis. Throughout these successive upheavals, the resilience of Calgary's cultural
ecosystem has been repeatedly stress-tested and there is a growing sense of urgency related
to the financial health and instability of cultural spaces across the city.
Taking advantage of significant databases compiled for the 2016 Cultural Plan, 2020 Spacefinder
platform, and current sources such as West Anthem’s music venue data, AEA has identified
and tracked a range of venues, creative businesses, community spaces, and non-profits that
have had to relocate (n=79) or closed permanently (n=212) over the last eight years. While
the most volatility has been experienced by Calgary’s live music venues, space instability
impacts both non-profit and commercial enterprises across the arts, culture and creative
sector, including closures of:
§Artists’ studio ‘hives’ such as Slate Studios, Artpoint Gallery and Studios, Art Central,
Voltage Creative Garage, Loft 112, Apik Gallery and St Stephens Anglican Church artist
studios
§A diversity of commercial grassroots venues supporting the local music scene such as
Blues Can (relocated), Broken City, Café Koi and The Backlot, one of the city’s few
LGBTQ+ venues
§Central screening capacity such as the portfolio of small cinemas at Eau Claire Market
§All ages venues such as Tubby Dog and more recently Cosmic Creatures Studios and
Rumble House
Current state of financial recovery
60
FIGURE 54 Locations of Closed or Relocated Spaces
Closed
Moved
Cultural spaces continue to be at-risk
Figures 54 and 55 illustrates the geography of closures and relocations AEA has identified since
2016 however many valued cultural spaces continue to be at risk in central Calgary, including:
§Globe Theatre – the Downtown independent screening rooms supporting the Calgary
International Film Festival and Calgary Underground Film Festival are currently up for sale
§nvrlnd – the studio facility in Ramsay is in an interim lease with the City of Calgary and the
site is intended to be redeveloped as part of the Green Line transit corridor
§The Grand – the central theatre property was sold to Allied Properties in 2021 to
alleviate facility cost pressures and a sustainable, operating model has yet to be proven out
§Alberta Ballet School – their Beltline location lease is terminating in two years due to
owner redevelopment plans
§Ver tigo Theatre is on a shor ter-term lease in their current Downtown location
§West Village Theatre, Calgar y Young People’s Theatre workshop, Quickdraw Animation
Society, EMMEDIA and the BOWS have had demolition clauses added to lease renewals
based on the owner’s redevelopment plans at the Sunalta property
§FUSE33 Makerspace’s landowner in Forest Lawn is considering redevelopment
§Big Secret Theatre and Motel Theatre are anticipated to be redeveloped as a result of
future renovations of the existing Arts Commons complex
§Springboard Performance’s containR site (City-owned) has been transferred to support
new affordable housing development – no new site has been identified
§Evergreen Theatre and Community SPACES is facing closure due to debt restructuring
Current state of financial recovery
Sources: AEA Interviews; 2024 Venue Operator Survey – written comments 61
FIGURE 55 Space Closures and Relocations 2016 - 2024
85
37
28
22
12
12
10
3
3
6
23
11
2
14
9
14
Commercial - Occasional Venue
Commercial - Training Facility
Presentation Spaces
Community/Civic Space
Digital Media Spaces
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
Creative Office Space
Commercial - Event Space
Live Performance Spaces
Closed Moved
Current state of financial recovery
Sources: 2024 Spotlight on Arts Audiences – Summer/Fall, Stone-Olufson; 2022 Citizen Engagement Survey, Stone-Olufson; 2022 Demographic Profile of Calgary’s Arts Sector, Calgary Arts Development; 2023 Imagine This, Calgary Arts
Development; 2024 Arts Community Pulse Survey, Canada Council for the Arts; 2023 Cultural Infrastructure Index, AEA Consulting; 62
Venues face complex and uncertain pathways to recovery
As the community approaches the five-year mark since the onset of the pandemic, Calgary’s
arts, culture and creative sector is navigating precarious pathways to recovery and adaptation,
intensified by the inevitable ‘stack-effect’ of recent economic and social shocks. Artists, cultural
organizations and creative businesses who develop and operate arts and cultural spaces have
distinctive challenges as enterprises seeking to redefine their relevancy, strengthen viability and
generate impact for the communities they serve and the creative ecosystem they directly
support.
Emerging from the pandemic disruptions, these facility-based social and cultural enterprises
face what may be an inflection point, needing to rapidly transform their programming,
operations, technology and business strategies to address several critical, and concurrent,
challenges:
§
Rising operational costs
have forced operators to restructure their financial models and
find innovative ways to maintain sustainability while delivering their missions
§
Cultural workforces are under immense strain
with recruitment and retention of talent
increasingly more difficult, and burnout more prevalent
§
Reduced discretionary household spending
has intensified competition for consumers’
attention and loyalty, compelling organizations to demonstrate unique value propositions,
reduce friction of experiences and strengthen community connections as people redefine
their relationship with the arts and pathways to engagement
§
Evolving artist and audience expectations
has motivated venue-based organizations to
accelerate efforts toward fostering more compelling experiences (digital and in-person),
driving an urgency for greater intentionality and adaptability to support a diversity of
cultural expressions and artistic activity
§
Long-standing inequities
in the sector have been exposed and exacerbated by the
pandemic, requiring a commitment to greater equity, access and inclusiveness while
ensuring these initiatives are meaningful and sustainable
§
Environmental sustainability
concerns and regulatory requirements have become a more
central consideration, requiring facility operators to implement practical climate action
strategies that align with their organizational capabilities and resources
Small
Budget
<$500k
46%
(n=25)
Mid-Sized
to Large
Budget
>$500k
54%
(n=29)
Live
Performance
31%
(n=17)
Presentation
28%
(n=15)
Production/
Rehearsal
41%
(n=22)
Venue financial analysis methodology
Calgary Arts Development receives annual financial and program reports from
arts organizations that receive operating grant support (198 grantees in 2023).
To g a t h e r p r e l i m i n a r y i n s i g h t s o n p r e - and post-pandemic financial health of
facility-based organizations, AEA identified organizations that reported some or
all of the following facility-related revenue and expense items:
§Facility operating expenses including general facility expenses, salaries for
employees that operate the facility, storage fees, etc.;
§Rent or mortgage expenses for administrative space; and
§Earned revenue from facilities and equipment rental.
Those organizations were subsequently cross-checked as venue operators,
generating a final cohort of over 50 facilities in each of the five reporting years
between 2019 (pre-pandemic) to 2023 (most current). In 2023, venue
operators represented 25% of the total grantees.
To i d e n t i f y t r e n d s i m p a c t i n g C a l g a r y ’s c u l t u r a l s p a c e s , f i n a n c i a l d a t a f o r v e n u e
operators was analyzed using the typologies framework (Figure 18) as well as
operating budget categories (Figure 56). Due to the number of facilities (n=54)
in the cohort and the mobility of organizations across budget categories over
the five-year reporting periods, AEA has consolidated budget groups (Figure
57), generally representative of small and mid-sized to large operating scales.
A set of key financial metrics are used to gather insights on the cohort’s
financial health pre- and post-pandemic based on these two lenses of analysis.
Current state of financial recovery
Sources: Calgary Arts Development operating grantee annual financial report data 2019-2023; artsaction.ca/2023-grant-investment-programs/ 63
FIGURE 56 CADA Operating Budget Categories
FIGURE 58 Grantees – % of Total Venues by Major Type 2023 (n=54)
FIGURE 57 Grantees – % of Total Venues by Budget Groups 2023 (n=54)
Group Category Budget Range
Aup to $50,000
B$50,001 – $100,000
C$100,001 – $200,000
D$200,001 – $500,000
E$500,001 – $1,000,000
F$1,000,001 – $3,000,000
G$3,000,001 and over
Small
Operating Budget:
Mid-Sized to Large
Operating Budget:
Financial performance indicators – net margin ratio
Net Margin Ratio measures an organization’s ability to operate at a surplus (calculated as net
income/total revenue). As a high-level indicator of a diverse group of venues, the ratio does not
account for all the nuances of complex operating environments – it does however signal risk
trends in the venue cohort’s capacity to fund ongoing operations and programs. Facilities that
have 2-3 years of negative ratios are generally considered a medium risk category (indicating
rising costs outpace revenue growth on a regular basis). Venues who consistently have negative
ratios over 4-5 years indicate potentially unsustainable operations and are at a high risk of
depleting reserves and eventual insolvency:
§
Live Performance Spaces
had the highest share of negative ratios heading into the
pandemic – 63% of organizations in the category ran a deficit in 2019; nearly 60% of Live
Performance Spaces are in the medium risk category and 12% could be considered as
high-risk; following the inflow of relief funding (e.g. CERB, CEWS*) and expense reduction
activity during COVID-19 shutdowns in 2020/21, the prevalence of negative ratios in 2023
for Live Performance Spaces has increased slightly to 65%
§
Presentation Spaces
had a similarly high share of negative ratios in 2019 (57%), though
reducing to 43% in 2023; these spaces have the largest proportion among the three types
of venues in the high risk category at 20%, with nearly half operating in the medium risk
group
§
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
had a 29% proportion of negative ratios in 2019, increasing
to 36% in 2023; these venues have the lowest risk profile, with 67% having no years or only
one year of negative ratios, double the rate of the other two categories; despite healthier
financial performance generally than the other two categories, 1/4 of the venues are in the
medium risk group and 8% remain at a high risk
Current state of financial recovery
*:Canada Emergency Response Benefit and Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy were both Government of Canada special support measures 64
FIGURE 59 Grantees – % Share of Category with Negative Net Margin by Major Group 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 60 Grantees – Level of Potential Risk (Years of Negative Net Margin Ratios) by Major Type 2019 - 2023
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Live Performance
Presentation
Production / Rehearsal
Major Type
Low Risk
(0-1 yrs)
Medium Risk
(2-3 yrs)
High Risk
(4-5 yrs)
Live Performance Spaces 29% 59% 12%
Presentation Spaces 33% 47% 20%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 67% 25% 8%
Financial performance indicators – net margin ratio (cont’d)
§
Small Budget Spaces
(under $500k) had half the proportion (30%) of negative ratios in
2019 as larger organizations – by 2023, the share of the category had increased to 36%;
smaller budget venues were generally operating with (relatively) better financial health
over the last five years - 57% operating at low risk levels and 11% at high risk
§
Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces
(greater than $500k) had the highest share of negative
ratios by category heading into the pandemic (61%). Following COVID-19 emergency
funding programs that improved the balance sheet for many organizations, the share
increased again to similar levels in 2023; over five years, larger budget venues exhibited a
higher risk profile across the three measures, with 50% in the medium risk level and just
over 14% in the high risk level
§Figure 63 illustrates the venue cohort subdivided into percentiles (bottom 25%, median,
and top 75%) based on median operating surplus in 2019, contrasted with their operating
position in 2023 – the graph indicates a growing gap between profitable and unprofitable
venues, reflecting similar trends seen in recent national research*:
•
Bottom 25%
in median surplus for organizations was -4.9% in 2019 and -6.9% in 2023, indicating
venues who were operating with deficits heading into the pandemic tended to slip into deeper
deficit
•
To p 7 5 %
in median surplus for organizations
was 6.3% in 2019 and improved to 9.3% in 2023,
indicating venues operating in the top percentile tended to improve their financial outlooks
The venue cohort faces substantial operating pressures with over 2/3 of consumption focused
venues indicating financial operating profiles that are at medium to high risk. Production
focused spaces and smaller budget venues illustrate more positive profiles.
Current state of financial recovery
* SMU DataArts (https://culturaldata.org/national-trends-2024/bottom-line-and-working-capital/); 2024 Arts Community Pulse Survey, Canada Council for the Arts 65
FIGURE 61 Grantees – % Share of Category with Negative Net Margin by Budget Group 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 62 Grantees – Level of Risk (Years of Negative Net Margin Ratios) by Budget Group 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 63 Grantees – Median Surplus by Percentile 2019/2023
Budget Group
Low Risk
(0-1 yrs)
Medium Risk
(2-3 yrs)
High Risk
(4-5 yrs)
Small Budget (<$500k) 57% 32% 11%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget (>500k) 36% 50% 14%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Small Budget (<$500k)
Mid-Sized to Large Budget (>$500k)
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
20 19 20 23
Median surplus for venues in the top 75%
Median surplus for all venues
Median surplus for venues in the bottom 25%
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Small Budget (<$500k)
Mid-Sized to Large Budget (>$500k)
Financial performance indicators – revenue diversification index
A Revenue Diversification Index is a metric used to assess the balance and variety of revenue
streams in a venue’s financial structure, with a higher index indicating greater diversification and
a lower index suggesting reliance on fewer sources. Using median values of the cohort, the
index provides insight into how dependent the category of organizations is on particular
revenue sources (e.g. earned revenue) and the relative financial stability of the organizations.
A healthy index value reflects a moderately balanced revenue mix that minimizes financial risk
while ensuring sufficient funding to meet organizational goals. A healthy range and balance
among revenue streams of 0.25–0.60 (on a 0–1 scale) is a reasonable guideline:
§
0.25 or below
: indicates over-reliance on one or two revenue sources, increasing financial
vulnerability – only a few venues of the cohort have five-year averages in this range,
predominantly smaller-budget, member-based studio operations or improv theatres that
rely almost exclusively on earned revenue
§
Above 0.60
: suggests excessive diversification, which could dilute focus and increase
administrative complexity – only larger, more complex organizations within the cohort
(with significant staff capacity) operate above this level on average over five years
§
Small Budget Spaces
have less diversity overall in their revenue streams with a median
value of 0.49 in 2023
§
Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces
tend to have higher index scores with a median value
of 0.59 in 2023 – only two organizations have five-year averages that are below 0.40
All categories show returns to similar levels of revenue diversification pre- and post-covid,
rebalancing from the inflow of federal COVID relief funding deployed to organizations and
sharp reductions of earned revenue through pandemic lockdowns..
Current state of financial recovery
:66
FIGURE 64 Grantees – Revenue Diversity Index by Major Type (Median) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 65 Grantees – Revenue Diversity Index by Budget Group (Median) 2019 - 2023
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Live Performance
Presentation
Production / Rehearsal
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Small Budget (<$500k)
Mid-Sized to Large Budget (>$500k)
Financial performance indicators – self sufficiency ratio
The Self-Sufficiency Ratio is another useful metric of financial health, reflecting the proportion
of total expenses covered by earned revenue in each category. Balancing complex mixes of
revenue sources is a critical aspect of financial management for arts and culture facilities.
However, the blend is highly variable depending on mission, audience demographics, market
dynamics and the availability of philanthropic or public support. Increasingly, a significant
portion of a facility-based organization’s income is expected to be generated through earned
income, including ticket sales, memberships, retail operations, space/equipment rentals, etc.:
§
Live Performance Spaces
have experienced a reduction in the self-sufficiency ratio in
2023 (31%) compared to 2019 (40%)
§
Presentation Spaces
has reduced by half, from its value of 16% in 2023 to 8% in 2023
§Relative to facilities that are more heavily consumption-focused,
Production/Rehearsal
Spaces
maintained a consistent proportion of earned revenue over the five-year period –
the median ratio dropped by less than 10% during the pandemic and has restored to
similar levels (30%) in 2023
§
Small Budget Spaces
have restored their share of costs covered by earned revenue in
2023 (26%), compared to 2019 (25%)
§
Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces
exhibited a deeper decline during COVID-19 and
have lost self sufficiency, reducing to 27% from their 2019 high point of 32%
Self sufficiency has declined across most facility types since 2019, with Presentation Spaces
experiencing the sharpest drops and showing limited trends to recovery. While Small Budget
spaces have regained pre-pandemic levels, larger venues have yet to achieve earlier levels of
self-sufficiency.
Current state of financial recovery
67
FIGURE 66 Grantees – Median Self Sufficiency Ratio by Major Type 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 67 Grantees – Median Self Sufficiency Ratio by Budget Group 2019 - 2023
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Live Performance
Presentation
Production / Rehearsal
$0.24M $0.28M
$0.09M $0.12M
$0.17M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other
Touring
Membership
Education
Rentals
Admissions
Median Earned
Revenue $
Earned revenue trends by major type
AEA has analyzed change (CAGR*) in the median earned revenue as well as its composition
based on six revenue categories: Admissions (e.g. box office subscriptions and single ticket
sales), Rentals (e.g. facility and equipment), Education (e.g. fees from workshops, classes,
conferences, meetings, and seminars), Membership (e.g. dues or fees), Touring (e.g. exhibition
rental), and Other earned revenue.
§Median earned revenue for the cohort’s
Live Performance Spaces
was $0.43 million in
2019 and has declined by -13.0% annually to $0.25 million in 2023, led by a –21.1% drop
in Facility/equipment rental revenue and a -14.7% decline annually in Admissions
§Median earned revenue for
Presentation Spaces
was $0.24 million in 2019 and has
declined by -8.2% annually to $0.17 million in 2023, driven by reductions in both Education
(-31.4%) and Touring (-34.0%) revenue – Membership revenue has improved (40.2%) and
Facility/equipment rentals has grown 8.9% annually
§Median earned revenue for
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
was $0.10 million in 2019 and
has increased by 12.9% annually to $0.16 million in 2023, with growth across most earned
income streams – similar to other audience-focused venues however, Admissions has
declined -9.6% annually
Current state of financial recovery
* CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate is the average annual growth over a specific period, effectively smoothing out
short-term fluctuations to provide a clearer picture of long-term trends 68
FIGURE 68 Grantees – Median Earned Revenue Sources for Live Performance Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 70 Grantees – Median Earned Revenue Sources for Production/Rehearsal Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 69 Grantees – Median Earned Revenue Sources for Presentation Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
$0.43M
$0.32M
$0.04M $0.18M
$0.25M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other
Touring
Membership
Education
Rentals
Admissions
Median Earned
Revenue $
$0.10M $0.10M $0.06M $0.08M
$0.16M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other
Touring
Membership
Education
Rentals
Admissions
Median Earned
Revenue $
Earned revenue trends by budget group
§Median earned revenue for the cohort’s
Small Budget Spaces
was $0.03 million in 2019
and has improved 4.1% annually to $0.04 million in 2023, with annual growth in
Membership (29.0%) and Touring (27.5%) revenue; Education (-8.3%), Admissions (-5.2%),
and Rentals (-2.2%) have all shown decline annually since 2019
§Median earned revenue for the cohort’s
Mid-Sized and Large Budget
Spaces
was $0.49
million in 2019, reducing by -24.5% annually to $0.16 million in 2023 – there were
significant declines in most revenue categories including Rentals (-27.2%), Education
(-26.4%), Admissions (-16.7%), Touring (-16.4%) and Membership (-11.8%)
Earned revenue has yet to recover to 2019 levels for many venue organizations when
adjusted for inflation. Live Performance Spaces experienced the steepest drop in earned
revenue during the pandemic and have yet to recover to previous admissions and rental
revenue levels. Mid-Sized and Large Budget Spaces have been unable to recoup pre-
pandemic levels of earned revenue with significant declines in most categories.
Current state of financial recovery
69
FIGURE 72 Grantees - Median Earned Revenue Sources for Mid-Sized/Large Budget Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 71 Grantees - Median Earned Revenue Sources for Small Budget Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
$0.03M $0.03M $0.01M $0.02M $0.04M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other
Touring
Membership
Education
Rentals
Admissions
Median Earned
Revenue $
$0.49M
$0.27M
$0.11M $0.13M $0.16M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other
Touring
Membership
Education
Rentals
Admissions
Median Earned
Revenue $
Government reliance ratio
The Government Reliance Ratio is a financial metric that measures the proportion of an arts
facility’s total revenue derived from government sources, including grants, subsidies, and public
funding. This ratio indicates the organization’s dependence on governmental support to sustain
operations and programming.
A high government reliance ratio suggests significant vulnerability to changes in public policy,
economic conditions, or funding priorities, which could impact financial stability. Conversely, a
low ratio indicates reduced dependency on government funding, often reflecting a stronger
reliance on earned revenue, private contributions and/or investment income.
§
Live Performance Spaces
were the lowest in 2019 in terms of reliance on government
sources of revenue at 28% - following a substantive inflow of emergency COVID recovery
funding (indicated by an unprecedented rise to 74%), the median has fallen back down to
37%
§
Presentation Spaces
had the highest median value in 2019 (48%) and has emerged from
COVID at similar levels in 2023 (50%)
§
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
relied on public funding levels of 38% in 2019 and has
returned to similar, though elevated, levels in 2023 (42%)
§
Small Budget Spaces
returned to similar pre-pandemic levels, hovering just under 50%
pre- and post- pandemic
§
Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces
increased their public sector funding reliance, moving
from 33% in 2019 to 37% in 2023
Current state of financial recovery
70
FIGURE 73 CADA Grantees – Median Government Reliance Index by Major Type 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 74 CADA Grantees – Median Government Reliance Index by Budget Group 2019 - 2023
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Live Performance
Presentation
Production / Rehearsal
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Small Budget (<$500k)
Mid-Sized to Large Budget (>$500k)
Public revenue composition by major type
AEA has analyzed the share of median public revenue (adjusted for inflation) by source and
tracked change (CAGR*) between 2019 and 2023 to illustrate shifts in composition post-
pandemic by both Major Type and Budget Group:
§Median public investment in the cohort’s
Live Performance Spaces
was $0.41 million in
2019 and has grown at 3.9% annually to $0.47 million in 2023
§
Federal
investment share peaked during the COVID-19 emergency funding deployment at 55% in
2021 and has returned to pre-pandemic levels at 36% in 2023 (growing 2.6% annually)
§
Provincial
funding has grown by 4.4% and is slightly above their Federal counterparts at 39% in
2023
§
Municipal
investment has grown by 3.9% since 2019, achieving a similar proportion of public
funding in 2023 at 23%.
§Median public investment in the cohort’s
Presentation Spaces
was $0.21 million in 2019
and has grown at 7.4% annually to $0.28 million in 2023.
§
Federal
funding has grown at 10.0% annually, representing a slightly higher share in 2023 (34%)
§
Provincial
investment has increased by 2.2%, reducing its share from 47% in 2019 to 38% in 2023
§
Municipal
funding has grown by 11.7% annually, increasing its share to 25% in 2023
§Median public investment in the cohort’s
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
was $0.22 million
in 2019 and recovered to similar levels in 2023 (a slight decline of -0.4% annually).
§
Federa
l funding has grown at 2.1% annually, now the largest funder by share in 2023 (47%)
§
Provincial
funding declined by -6.9% annually, reducing its share from 46% in 2019 to 35% in 2023
§
Municipal
funding share has doubled in 2023 (18%) compared to 2019 (9%), growing at 16.9%
annually
Current state of financial recovery
* CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate is the average annual growth over a specific period, effectively smoothing out
short-term fluctuations to provide a clearer picture of long-term trends 71
FIGURE 75 CADA Grantees – Median Public Revenue Sources for Live Performance Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 77 CADA Grantees – Median Public Revenue Sources for Production/Rehearsal Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 76 CADA Grantees – Median Public Revenue Sources for Presentation Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
$0.41M
$0.52M
$0.68M
$0.49M $0.47M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other Public
Federal
Provincial
Municipal
Median Public $
$0.21M $0.24M
$0.35M $0.34M $0.28M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other Public
Federal
Provincial
Municipal
Median Public $
$0.22M
$0.15M
$0.30M $0.28M
$0.22M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other Public
Federal
Provincial
Municipal
Median Public $
Public revenue trends by budget group
§Median public investment in the cohort’s
Small Budget Spaces
was $0.17 million in 2019,
recovered to that level during the COVID relief funding period in 2021, and has been
declining slowly yet steadily in the following two years (-0.8% annually)
§
Federal
funding has increased slightly by 2.2% annually, improving upon its prominence as a
funding source at 50%
§
Provincial
investment has declined by -12.3% annually, representing a reduced share from 46% in
2019 (equal to the Federal portion) to 27% in 2023
§
Municipal
investment has shown the most significant increase, growing by 14.1% annually since
2019. As a proportion, the City provides 15% of median total funding compared to 9% in 2019
§Median public investment in the cohort’s
Mid-sized to Large Budget Spaces
was $0.35
million in 2019 and has grown at 9.0% annually to $0.49 million in 2023
§
Federal
funding has increased its share to 37% in 2023, compared to 32% in 2019, growing at
13.1% annually
§
Provincia
l investment has increased by 4.2% annually, though representing a reduction in share
from 45% in 2019 to 38% in 2023
§
Municipal
investment has grown by 11.5% annually since 2019, though remains as the funding
source with the lowest share at 23% in 2023 (a small increase from 21% in 2019)
The overall amount of public revenue has grown since 2019, but the composition has shifted
as the Federal pandemic emergency investment wave has receded. Municipal investment as a
% of total public funds has generally increased between 2019-2023.
Current state of financial recovery
:72
FIGURE 78 Grantees – Median Public Revenue Sources for Small Budget Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 79 Grantees – Median Public Revenue Sources for Mid-Sized/Large Budget Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
$0.35M
$0.41M
$0.64M
$0.59M
$0.49M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other Public
Federal
Provincial
Municipal
Median Public $
$0.17M $0.14M $0.17M $0.17M $0.17M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Other Public
Federal
Provincial
Municipal
Median Public $
Expense trends by major type
AEA has analyzed the changing composition of median expenses* (adjusted for inflation) from
2019-2023:
§Median expenses for the cohort’s
Live Performance Spaces
was $1.25 million and has
declined by -1.6% annually to $1.17 million in 2023
§
Marketing/Fundraising
expenses dropped by -15.7% annually, dropping its share by nearly half to
11% in 2023
§
Administration
showed the most substantial growth at 14.2% annually, representing a 26% share
in 2023 compared to 14% in 2019
§
Facility Operating
costs (including staff) have declined by -3.8%, with a similar proportion of total
expenses in 2023 (18%)
§Median expenses for
Presentation Spaces
was $0.43 million in 2019 and has declined by -
-2.3% annually to $0.39 million in 2023
§
Marketing/Fundraising
costs declined the most by -5.2% annually
§
Administration
showed the only growth as an expense category at 1.1% annually
§
Facility Operating
costs (including staff) have declined by -2.7%
§Similar shares of total expenses were maintained from 2019 to 2023
§Median expenses for
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
was $0.26 million and has increased
by 2.6% annually to $0.29 million in 2023
§
Marketing/Fundraising
costs grew at the highest rate of 18.5%
§
Facility Operating
costs have increased by 1.8%
§Similar shares of total expenses were maintained from 2019 to 2023
Current state of financial recovery
* Calgary Arts Development requests grantee reports include full and part-time salaries related to facilities to be included
in the operating expense category – staff reduction during and following COVID-19 may obscure the substantive
escalations in utility, insurance, and other fixed facility costs reported broadly across facilities in Calgary. 73
FIGURE 80 CADA Grantees – Median Expenses for Live Performance Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 82 CADA Grantees – % of Median Expenses for Production/Rehearsal Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 81 CADA Grantees – Median Expenses for Presentation Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
$1.25M
$0.98M
$0.67M
$1.00M
$1.17M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Administration
Marketing & Fundraising
Artistic
Facility Operating
Median Total Expenses
$0.26M $0.27M $0.23M $0.23M $0.29M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Administration
Marketing & Fundraising
Artistic
Facility Operating
Median Total Expenses
$0.43M $0.52M
$0.42M $0.36M $0.39M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Administration
Marketing & Fundraising
Artistic
Facility Operating
Median Total Expenses
Expense trends by budget group
§Median total expenses for the cohort’s
Small Budget Spaces
was $0.20 million in 2019
has reduced by -3.6% annually to $0.17 million in 2023
§
Marketing/Fundraising
is the only expense category that grew over the period (10.6% annually)
§
Facility Operating
costs (including staff) reduced by -8.6% and as a proportion of overall costs
from 2019 (29%) to 2023 (24%)
§Median total expenses for
Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces
was $1.06 million in 2019
and has increased by 6.5% annually to $1.4 million in 2023
§Annual increases in
Administration
(15.8%) and
Marketing/Fundraising
(10.1%) expenses are
evident, growing the share of both categories to 25% and 15% respectively in 2023
§
Facility Operating
costs (including staff) increased at 0.3% annually and remained consistent as a
proportion of overall costs from 16% (2019) to 13% (2023)
Current state of financial recovery
74
FIGURE 84 CADA Grantees – % of Median Expenses for Mid-Sized to Large Budget Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
FIGURE 83 CADA Grantees – % of Median Expenses for Small Budget Spaces (Inflation Adj.) 2019 - 2023
$0.20M $0.19M $0.14M $0.17M $0.17M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Administration
Marketing & Fundraising
Artistic
Facility Operating
Median Total Expenses
$1.06M
$0.95M
$0.72M
$1.08M
$1.36M
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Administration
Marketing & Fundraising
Artistic
Facility Operating
Median Total Expenses
Survey methodology
Building from the financial trends analysis of facility-based organizations that receive operating
grants from Calgary Arts Development, an online survey was prepared by AEA to capture
detailed perspectives and operating data from facility operators across a range of venue types
and budget sizes.
The survey link was circulated to approximately 240 recipients by Calgary Arts Development,
open from July to September 2024. The survey list comprised venue-based grantees,
members of the Creative Spaces Community of Practice, Federation of Calgary Communities
member organizations (with facilities) and key education/faith-based sites who support
significant levels of artistic programming. 62 surveys were fully completed and used for analysis.
The structure of the survey focused on the following key operating areas:
§
General information
(including type of incorporation, location. years operating, geographic
market, discipline focus and type of venue, facility size and nature of the facility)
§
Facility budget and financials
(including budget size, facility related operating expenses,
most challenging issues, pre- and post-Covid changes in operating categories and funding
sources)
§
Infrastructure quality/condition
(including general system quality ratings, levels of deferred
maintenance and physical accessibility issues)
§
Venue utilization
(including typical usage, detailed capacity/utilization rates by individual
type of space and level of waiting lists)
§
Regulatory issues
(including types of zoning, permits or licenses obtained and regulatory
issues faced)
Venue operator survey insights
* See Figure 18 Framework of Cultural/Creative Space Typologies 75
§
Stability of tenure/ownership
(including level of ownership, lease terms and indicators of
stability/vulnerability)
§
Expansion plans and capital expenditures
(including 5-10 year plans, scale and focus of
capital projects)
§
Confidence levels for the future
(including perspectives on pre- and post-pandemic
financial status, likelihood of future operations, and level of perceived risk of vulnerability)
The findings presented in this analysis should be interpreted with some caution due to the
small sample size (n=62). While the data provides valuable insights into the operations of
smaller consumption and production spaces, it may not fully represent trends across the
broader typologies of spaces* or organizational dynamics beyond this group.
In particular, the limited number of respondents in the category of Presentation Spaces
(n=6) and their spread from major anchor facilities to small artist-run centres has significant
limitations.
As such, the results are best understood as indicative rather than definitive, offering a focused
perspective rather than a basis for generalizable conclusions. Where possible, raw counts and
percentages are communicated to provide context and full data tables from the survey are
included in Appendix 2 for clarity.
General information
The venue cohort is relatively balanced across Live Performance (29%), Production/Rehearsal
(35%), and Community/Civic (26%) venues – a small number of Presentation organizations
responded (10%):
§The Community/Civic group is a blend of Multi-purpose Spaces including community
association facilities, churches, ethno-cultural groups and libraries
§Within the Live Performance group (n=18), 89% of the respondents are Small-Sized
Performance Spaces (1 - 400 person), a similar prevalence of the same group as the
Calgary Arts Development’s grantee cohort in the previous venue financial analysis
§The Production/Rehearsal group represents a relative split between Creative
Studios/Makerspaces (n=10) and Dance/Theatre Rehearsal Spaces (n=12)
§The Presentation group is weighted towards Major Museum, Archive, or Gallery spaces
(n=4) with a limited response from smaller Non-Profit Exhibition spaces (n=2)
From a budget size perspective, AEA has maintained the consolidated groups used in the
previous analysis of the grantee cohort for consistency and to manage data limitations:
§ Small Budget <$500k organizations (56%)
§Up to $100,000 (n=7)
§$100,001 to $500,000 (n=28)
§Mid-sized to Large Budget >$500k organizations (44%)
§$500,001 - $3 million (n=18)
§Over $3 million (n=9)
Venue operator survey insights
76
Small
Budget
<$500k
56%
(n=35)
Mid-Sized
to Large
Budget
>$500k
44%
(n=27)
Production /
Rehearsal
35%
(n=22)
Live
Performance
29%
(n=18)
Community
/ Civic
26%
(n=16)
Presentation
10%
(n=6)
FIGURE 85 Venues by Major Type - % of Total (n=62)
FIGURE 86 Venues by Budget Categories - % of Total (n=62)
General information (cont’d)
§The cohort has a broad distribution across small spaces under 5,000 sq. ft. (46%), mid-
sized under 50,000 sq. ft. (40%) and large facilities (15%) over 50,000 sq. ft. - the mix of
building sizes indicates the cohort serves diverse needs and scales of operation
§There is a notable concentration of respondents in newer buildings: 34% are less than 20
years old – 16% are located in some of Calgary’s century-old heritage resources
§Nearly half (48%) of the venues are well-established, operating in their current locations
for over 10 years – one quarter are recently established venues with only 1-5 years of
operations
§Adaptive reuse is the most common approach to developing venues (39%), though
combined approaches of both purpose-built and adapted represent an equally significant
portion (32%) – less than ¼ are strictly purpose-built facilities
Venue operator survey insights
:77
FIGURE 88 Venues by Building Age - % of Total (n=62)
FIGURE 90 Venues by Nature of Development Approach - % of Total (n=62)
FIGURE 89 Venues by Years Operating as Arts/Culture Space - % of Total (n=62)
FIGURE 87 Venues by Building Size Group - % of Total (n=62)
15%
19%
21%
23%
23%
Over 50,000 sq. ft. (n=9)
10,001-50,000 sq. ft. (n=12)
5,001-10,000 sq. ft. (n=13)
2,501-5,000 sq. ft. (n=14)
Less than 2,500 sq. ft. (n=14)
13%
16%
26%
11%
34%
Unkown (n=8)
Over 100 years (n=10)
40-100 years (n=16)
20-39 years (n=7)
Less than 20 years (n=21)
48%
26%
26%
Over 10 Yrs (n=30)
6-10 yrs (n=16)
1-5 yrs (n=16)
6%
32%
39%
23%
Not sure / other (n=4)
Combination (n=20)
Adapted (n=24)
Purpose-built (n=14)
19
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
General information (cont’d)
§The venue cohort has strong representation from the performing arts – 38% support
primary disciplines of Dance, Music or Theatre (n=24)
§Over 1/3 of respondents identified their venues as multi-disciplinary (n=21)
§While the cohort represents both urban and suburban locations, respondents are located
predominantly in established central communities in Calgary – illustrated in Figure 93, over
half are in three Forward Sortation Areas (FSA) – T2G (n=19), T2E (n=7), and T2T (n=6)
§While centrally clustered, the majority (56%) serve the Calgary regional market (n=35)
and 16% have an even broader provincial remit (n=10)
Venue operator survey insights
:78
FIGURE 91 Venues Primary Arts Discipline - % of Total
(n=62)
FIGURE 93 Locations of Venue Survey Respondents by FSA
5%
34%
19%
11%
10%
8%
6%
3%
2%
2%
Other (n=3)
Multi-disciplinary (n=21)
Theatre (n=12)
Music (n=7)
Visual Arts (n=6)
Dance (n=5)
Culture/Heritage (n=4)
Film/Television/New Media (n=2)
Arts Services (n=1)
Community Arts/Social Practice (n=1)
FIGURE 92 Venues by Market Area - % of Total (n=62)
Calgary
Region
(n=35)
56%
Province-
Wide
(n=10)
16%
City
Centre
(n=8)
13%
Other
Quadrant
13%
Local
(n=1)
2%
FIGURE 94 Venue Organizational Structure by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Category
General information (cont’d)
Figure 94 shows the organizational structure/legal status breakdown across the cohort’s
different categories:
§Not-for-Profit Societies and Charities dominate across all categories
§Production/Rehearsal spaces have more entrepreneurial structures evident than other
typologies, reflecting a more diverse distribution of Incorporated Businesses (23%) and
Part 9 Not-for-Profit Corporations (14%) – this reflects the prevalence of
studio/workspace respondents that more closely align with commercial operations
§Community/Civic organizations have the highest concentration of Not-for-Profit Societies
at 63%
§Live Performance venues show a strong split between Not-for-Profit Societies (50%) and
Charities (39%)
§Small budget organizations (<$500k) predominantly operate as Not-for-Profit Societies
(51%), followed by Charities (29%) - Business Incorporations make up 14% of these
venues, with a small percentage of Part 9 Not-for-Profit Corporations.
§Mid-sized to Large Budget organizations ($500k+) show more balanced distribution
between Not-for-Profit Societies (33%) and Charities (44%)
§Charities are more prevalent in Presentation (50%) and larger budget organizations (44%)
§In most cases, the high level of ‘Other’ structures noted by respondents was to reinforce
that a mix of multiple forms was incorporated across their business models
Venue operator survey insights
79
33%
51%
63%
50%
33%
27%
44%
29%
31%
39%
50%
32%
11%
6%
6%
6%
14%
14%
23%
11%
6%
17%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >500k (n=27)
Small Budget <500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Not-for-Profit Society Charity Part 9 Not-for-Profit Corp. Business Inc. Other
Facility budget and financials
Figure 95 and Figure 96 illustrate revenue
distribution for organizations, showing the
current balance of revenue as well as the
primary funding source for venues:
§Production/Rehearsal spaces report the
importance of earned revenue (45%) as a
primary funding source
§Live Performance venues rely most heavily
on earned revenue as the primary source
(56%) and over 2/3 operate where earned
revenue outweighs contributed
§Most Presentation venues rely heavily on
contributed revenue and predominantly
government sources (67%)
§Small Budget organizations have a much
more significant reliance on Provincial
funding (23%) as a primary source than
their larger counterparts (4%)
§Mid-Sized to Large Budget venues are split
equally between those that rely heavily on
earned revenue (45%) and those that focus
on contributed revenue stacks (45%)
Venue operator survey insights
Note: The high values related to ‘Other’ in Figure 92 reflect reports of multiple funding
sources with no discernible ‘primary’ one
80
FIGURE 95 Current Balance of Venue Revenue by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Category
FIGURE 96 Venue Primary Funding Source by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Category
26%
31%
19%
39%
36%
19%
14%
19%
28%
9%
4%
9%
18%
19%
11%
6%
17%
33%
14%
26%
23%
31%
11%
67%
18%
7%
11%
25%
6%
5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >$500k (n=27)
Small Budget < $500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Earned >>> Contributed Earned > Contributed Earned = Contributed Contributed > Earned Contributed >>> Earned Not sure / Other
41%
51%
25%
56%
45%
15%
6%
19%
6%
50%
4%
23%
6%
6%
17%
9%
11%
3%
11%
9%
4%
3%
17%
5%
11%
9%
25%
6%
5%
4%
6%
25%
17%
17%
27%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >$500k (n=27)
Small Budget < $500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Earned Revenue Municipal Provincial Federal Foundations Philanthropy Other
Facility budget and financials (cont’d)
§Production/Rehearsal and Community/Civic spaces reported the highest operating
expense burdens with 45% and 44% respectively spending over 50% of their
operating expenses on facilities - the gap between other categories widens when
analyzing above 40% share
§Presentation and Live Performance venues demonstrate identical patterns, with
33% of organizations in each category spending over 50% on facility-related
expenses
§Production/Rehearsal venues experienced the most dramatic increase, with 55%
of organizations reporting significantly increased operating expenses from pre-
pandemic levels – other categories demonstrated slightly lower but still substantial
increases, with Presentation and Live Performance at 50%
§Small Budget organizations show a notably higher proportion of facility-related
expenses, with 59% of these organizations spending over 50% of their operating
budget on facilities - this suggests that smaller organizations have a greater
vulnerability to operational cost pressures – 46% of these organizations reported
significant expense increases and 22% reporting moderate escalation
§Mid-Sized to Large Budget organizations experienced the most substantial
increases, with 56% reporting significantly increased expenses and 15% reporting
moderate increases
Venue operator survey insights
81
FIGURE 97 Facility Related Expenses as a Proportion of Total Operating by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Category
FIGURE 98 Change in Venue Operating Expenses From Pre-Pandemic by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Category
51%
59%
44%
33%
33%
45%
11%
7%
19%
14%
9%
7%
13%
6%
9%
29%
26%
25%
62%
67%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >$500k (n=27)
Small Budget < $500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Over 50% 41% - 50% 31% - 40% Up to 30%
56%
46%
44%
50%
50%
55%
15%
23%
25%
6%
33%
23%
30%
23%
31%
33%
17%
18%
9%
11%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >$500k (n=27)
Small Budget < $500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
1 (Significantly increased) 2 3 (Stayed the same) 4 5 (Significantly decreased)
29%
77%
56%
53%
53%
45%
37%
34%
34%
26%
23%
21%
11%
Other
Increase in venue operating costs
Requirements for technology upgrades
Difficulty securing capital funding
Increase in labour costs
Deferred maintenance issues
Attendance/use has not returned to pre-COVID levels
Requirements for enhanced physical accessibility
Declines in public sector operating support
Overall decline in net revenue
Availability of technical staff
Changing artists’ needs
Regulatory compliance changes
Facility budget and financials (cont’d)
§Venue organizations face significant and diverse operational hurdles, with increased
venue costs (77%) being the most pressing challenge, labour cost escalation (53%)
and technical staff availability (23%) – on the revenue size, lower attendance/use
levels (37%) and overall decline in net revenue (26%) are reported as key issues
§Infrastructure-related challenges are also significant with organizations reporting
technology upgrades (56%), accessibility improvements (34%) and deferred
maintenance (45%) as key financial pressures
§Shifts in public funding is notable for its impact on venue organizations, with 34%
reporting declines in public sector operating support and 53% having difficulty in
securing capital funding
§Presentation and Live Performance venues show the highest stress level, with a
combined challenge level (‘Extremely’ and ‘Very Challenging’) of 50% - indicating a
vulnerability to current operational pressures
§Production/Rehearsal spaces report a notable 45% combined challenge level,
suggesting slightly lower but still significant management difficulties
§Community/Civic venues appear to be managing slightly better, with only 13%
reporting extreme challenges, though 25% still find operations very challenging
§Both Small Budget and Mid-Sized to Large Budget venues report substantial
challenges, with 43% and 45% respectively reporting Very to Extremely Challenging
management environments
Venue operator survey insights
Multiple responses for each issue therefore totals by category do not add up to 100% 82
FIGURE 99 Most Challenging Issues Faced by Operators - % of Total (n=62)
FIGURE 100 Overall Perception of Managing Operating Expenses by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Category
19%
20%
13%
22%
27%
26%
23%
25%
28%
50%
18%
44%
23%
44%
28%
33%
23%
7%
31%
19%
11%
17%
32%
4%
3%
11%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >$500k (n=27)
Small Budget < $500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Extremely challenging Very challenging Moderately challenging Slightly challenging Not challenging at all
6%
5%
5%
3%
2%
2%
2%
14%
8%
15%
13%
6%
11%
11%
6%
2%
2%
7%
5%
27%
26%
19%
15%
19%
15%
3%
5%
20%
29%
24%
28%
37%
20%
48%
8%
5%
7%
32%
10%
10%
18%
13%
15%
10%
23%
21%
3%
2%
3%
2%
3%
5%
2%
3%
71%
26%
13%
19%
26%
21%
31%
15%
63%
65%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Other
Rent or lease payments
Maintenance and repair costs
Utility costs
Technology and IT Infrastructure
Property insurance rates
Property maintenance services
Staff and salaries/wages
Financing or mortgage costs
Property taxes
Over 50% Increase 21-50% Increase 11-20% Increase 1-10% Increase
Facility budget and financials (cont’d)
§Cost escalation for Maintenance/Repair and Utilities show
the highest proportion of significant increases, with 20%
and 18% of facilities respectively reporting increases of over
20% (combining the ‘Over 50% increase’ and ‘21-50%
increase’ categories)
§Property Maintenance Services and Property Insurance
Rates both show identical patterns, with 13% of facilities
reporting over 20% increases
§Te c h no lo gy a nd I T I n fr a s tr u c t ur e co st s hav e r i s en n ot ably,
with 19% of venues reporting 11-20% increases
§This pattern of increasing costs aligns with the broader
challenges faced by operators, where 77% identified
increased venue operating costs as their most challenging
issue
Venue operator survey insights
83
FIGURE 101 Change in Facility Operating Expenses from Pre-Pandemic to Current Fiscal Year - % of Total (n=62)
11%
6%
6%
11%
17%
5%
15%
34%
25%
28%
33%
23%
52%
46%
50%
50%
17%
55%
19%
14%
19%
6%
33%
18%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget (>$500k)
Small Budget (<$500k)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Very dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied
Not sure/ Don’t know
2%
15%
8%
6%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
27%
8%
8%
15%
8%
3%
13%
21%
11%
11%
21%
23%
24%
21%
21%
18%
40%
31%
15%
34%
21%
29%
34%
31%
27%
37%
27%
26%
40%
29%
2%
16%
31%
26%
27%
13%
37%
13%
19%
32%
26%
8%
2%
2%
3%
27%
3%
5%
2%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Other
Physical accessibility features
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing)
Safety and security systems
Exterior (roofing, façade)
Aesthetic and historical preservation
Building structural integrity
Technology and IT infrastructure
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics)
Electrical systems
Interior finishes (walls, floors)
Very Poor Poor Acceptable Good Very Good Don't Know / N/A
Infrastructure quality and condition
§Consumption based venues have the lowest level of
satisfaction in their current state of infrastructure,
reporting “Very Dissatisfied” in 17% of Presentation
and 11% of Live Performance organizations
§Physical Accessibility Features shows the highest
combined poor ratings at 42% (15% “Very Poor”,
27% “Poor”), indicating significant compliance issues
with recognized standards
§Environmental Controls for assembly spaces show
notable deficiencies with 23% combined poor ratings
(2% ”Very Poor”, 21% “Poor”)
§Major systems (mechanical, technology, security, etc.)
had combined poor ratings between 14-18%,
suggesting the quality of critical building systems has
declined
§The pattern of challenges particularly impacts venues
that rely heavily on complex technical systems and
environmental controls for their core operations
Venue operator survey insights
84
FIGURE 103 Overall Perspective on Quality of Venue Infrastructure - % of Total (n=62)
FIGURE 102 Level of Satisfaction with Current State of Infrastructure by Major Type and Budget Group- % of Category
Infrastructure quality and condition (cont’d)
§Infrastructure quality data aligns with the 45% of
operators reporting deferred maintenance issues as
a major challenge, suggesting widespread facility
condition concerns across the cohort
§Physical Accessibility Features are reported as the
highest combined deferred maintenance level at 14%
(11% Very High, 3% High) – nearly 50% of venues
have Moderate to Very High levels of issues in this
category, raising potential concern about aspirations
for venues to accommodate more equitable access
§Mechanical Systems follow closely at 11% (6% Very
High, 5% High), an issue of importance due to
expectations of enhanced air quality post-COVID
§Te c h no lo gy a nd I T a s we ll a s E nv i r o n me nt al C on tr o l s
are reported with similar levels at 10% “Very High”,
core issues in public assembly venues
Venue operator survey insights
85
FIGURE 104 Overall Perspective on Level of Deferred Maintenance - % of Total (n=62)
11%
10%
10%
6%
6%
5%
5%
3%
3%
2%
2%
3%
3%
5%
5%
5%
2%
2%
3%
34%
35%
29%
8%
21%
23%
29%
29%
11%
16%
27%
31%
32%
31%
29%
42%
24%
40%
29%
35%
2%
21%
16%
23%
47%
34%
26%
27%
21%
24%
40%
5%
3%
8%
6%
5%
5%
5%
10%
2%
31%
5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Other
Physical accessibility features
Technology and IT infrastructure
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics)
Building structural integrity
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing)
Safety and security systems
Exterior (roofing, façade)
Interior finishes (walls, floors)
Aesthetic and historical preservation
Electrical systems
Very High High Moderate Low Very Low Don't Know / N/A
Venue utilization
§Creative workspaces are reported to be facing acute
space shortages:
§Artist Studio - Low Impact shows the most severe
capacity constraints, with 92% of spaces full/exceeding
capacity
§Office/Desk Space and Creation/Production Space
demonstrates significant pressure with 84% and 80%
respectively of spaces full/exceeding capacity
§Exhibition spaces show the highest reported pressure
with 97% of spaces full/exceeding capacity
§Space supporting the performing arts reveals some
contrast in space capacity:
§Theatre/Concert Hall operates at 65% of spaces
full/exceeding capacity
§Black Box/Studio Theatre is reported at 36% of spaces
full/exceeding capacity
§Rehearsal Space maintains the most flexibility with 72%
of spaces underutilized and regularly have availability
§Storage spaces illustrate significant capacity
constraints, with100% of spaces across all four
categories noted as full/exceeding capacity
Venue operator survey insights
Note: Numerical data is presented instead of percentages in this stacked bar graph to provide a more accurate representation of small response categories, which may be misleading if shown as percentages. This approach ensures that the scale
and impact of these smaller groups are clearly reflected without distortion. 86
FIGURE 105 Venue Space Utilization by Level of Operating Capacity - # of Total Spaces in Venues (n=335)
49
35
32
15
11
11
10
9
8
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
6
28
11
6
7
23
2
11
7
7
2
1
4
Artist Studio - Low Impact (n=53)
Exhibition and Gallery Space (n=36)
Office/Desk Space (n=38)
Indoor Event Space (n=43)
Classroom or Training Studio (n=22)
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall (n=17)
Meeting/Conference Space (n=17)
Rehearsal Space (n=32)
Creation/Production Space (n=10)
Art Storage - Climate Controlled (n=5)
Education and Collaboration Space (n=15)
Outdoor Event Space (n=11)
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre (n=11)
Theatre Storage (n=4)
Art Storage - Not Climate Controlled (n=3)
Storage Space (n=3)
Production Workshop (n=4)
Screening Room/Auditorium (n=3)
Box Office (n=1)
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio (n=5)
Public Amenity and Gathering Space (n=1)
Technical Training Lab (n=1)
Full or Exceeding Capacity
Underutilized/Regular Availability
Venue operator survey insights
Note: Numerical data is presented instead of percentages in this stacked bar graph to provide a more accurate representation of small response categories, which may be misleading if shown as percentages. This approach ensures that the scale
and impact of these smaller groups are clearly reflected without distortion. 87
FIGURE 106 Venue Space Utilization by Internal/External Use - # of Total Spaces in Venues (n=335)
Venue utilization (cont’d)
§Creative Workspaces
§Artist Studios maintain almost exclusively
resident/tenant use (98%)
§Office/Desk Space is predominantly resident use
(63%), but also supports external rentals (37%)
§Creation/Production Space is balanced across all three
usage types
§Performance and Rehearsal Spaces
§Theatre/Concert Halls operate with a usage split of
18% external rentals, 29% mixed use, and 53%
resident use
§Rehearsal Space maintains a 34% external rental focus
§Black Box theaters have a 55% external rental
emphasis
§ Exhibition and Gallery Spaces
§83% of exhibition spaces (30/36) are dedicated to
resident use
52
18
24
36
18
10
9
9
11
1
4
10
1
5
3
4
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
8
3
8
5
5
3
1
1
17
14
11
4
3
3
4
7
6
3
1
Artist Studio - Low Impact (n=53)
Indoor Event Space (n=43)
Office/Desk Space (n=38)
Exhibition and Gallery Space (n=36)
Rehearsal Space (n=32)
Classroom or Training Studio (n=22)
Meeting/Conference Space (n=17)
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall (n=17)
Education and Collaboration Space (n=15)
Outdoor Event Space (n=11)
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre (n=11)
Creation/Production Space (n=10)
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio (n=5)
Art Storage - Climate Controlled (n=5)
Production Workshop (n=4)
Theatre Storage (n=4)
Art Storage - Not Climate Controlled (n=3)
Screening Room/Auditorium (n=3)
Storage Space (n=3)
Box Office (n=1)
Public Amenity and Gathering Space (n=1)
Technical Training Lab (n=1)
Predominantly/Mostly Resident/Member/Tenant Use Balanced Use Predominantly/Mostly External Rentals
Venue utilization (cont’d)
§Artist Studios show overwhelming demand with 87%
having always/occasional waiting lists
§Creation/Production Space shows substantial
demand with 80% reporting waiting lists
§Black Box Theatres show high demand with 82%
reporting always/occasional waiting lists
§Theatre/Concert Halls demonstrate moderate
demand with 53% having waiting lists
§Rehearsal Space shows split demand with 47%
having waiting lists and 31% never having them
§Exhibition and Gallery Spaces show strong demand
with 69% reporting always/occasional waiting lists
§Screening Room/Auditorium spaces show slightly
lower demand with 67% reporting waiting lists
Venue operator survey insights
Note: Numerical data is presented instead of percentages in this stacked bar graph to provide a more accurate representation of small response categories, which may be misleading if shown as percentages. This approach ensures that the scale
and impact of these smaller groups are clearly reflected without distortion. 88
FIGURE 107 Venue Space Utilization by Prevalence of Waiting Lists - # of Total Spaces in Venues (n=335)
46
17
2
25
15
9
9
7
7
9
3
8
5
3
2
2
1
4
14
1
1
10
4
4
3
6
2
1
1
1
3
11
32
9
6
8
2
5
1
1
4
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
Artist Studio - Low Impact (n=53)
Indoor Event Space (n=43)
Office/Desk Space (n=38)
Exhibition and Gallery Space (n=36)
Rehearsal Space (n=32)
Classroom or Training Studio (n=22)
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall (n=17)
Meeting/Conference Space (n=17)
Education and Collaboration Space (n=15)
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre (n=11)
Outdoor Event Space (n=11)
Creation/Production Space (n=10)
Art Storage - Climate Controlled (n=5)
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio (n=5)
Production Workshop (n=4)
Theatre Storage (n=4)
Art Storage - Not Climate Controlled (n=3)
Screening Room/Auditorium (n=3)
Storage Space (n=3)
Box Office (n=1)
Public Amenity and Gathering Space (n=1)
Technical Training Lab (n=1)
Always/Occasionally Rarely Never Not sure
Regulatory environment
§Over half of the cohort have experience in obtaining
Business Licenses and 45% have had to acquire
building permits
§24% of venues defer to building owners
§High-Frequency Issues (>20% reporting
frequent/occasional encounters)
§Parking Requirements: Most common challenge at
40% frequency
§Alcohol Regulations: 28% of venues face regular issues
§License Requirements: 23% encounter frequent
challenges
§Capacity and Crowd Control: 23% report regular
concerns
§Building Codes and Safety Standards: 22% face
recurring issues
§Moderate-Frequency Issues (15-20%)
§Signage Regulations: 19% experience regular
challenges
§Historic Preservation Laws: 16% report frequent
issues
§Health and Sanitation Codes: 15% face recurring
concerns
Venue operator survey insights
89
FIGURE 108 Permits or Licenses Obtained for Venue - # of Total Venues (n=62)
16%
18%
24%
56%
45%
32%
6%
Other
Not aware of any requirements
Owner responsibility
Business license
Building permit
Development permit
Rezoning approval
FIGURE 109 Regulatory Issues Experienced by Operators - # of Total Venues (n=62)
2%
40%
28%
23%
23%
22%
19%
16%
15%
13%
13%
10%
9%
2%
15%
29%
18%
22%
20%
16%
13%
11%
12%
19%
11%
18%
3%
32%
32%
40%
39%
37%
47%
47%
56%
44%
53%
58%
55%
8%
13%
11%
19%
16%
21%
18%
24%
18%
32%
15%
21%
18%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Other
Parking Requirements
Alcohol Regulations
Licensing Requirements
Capacity and Crowd Control Regulations
Building Codes and Safety Standards
Signage Regulations
Historic Preservation Laws
Health and Sanitation Codes
Zoning Regulations
Noise Ordinances
Sub-leasing
Environmental Regulations
Frequently/Occasionally Rarely/Very Rarely Not at All N/A
Stability of tenure/ownership
§
Te n u r e a n d O w ne r s h i p ( n= 6 2 )
§Lease/License arrangements dominate at 73% of
venues
§City of Calgary owns 34% of the venues, all of which
are leased
§27% of venues are owned by their operators
§31% of leased buildings/spaces are controlled by
private owners, indicating higher levels of risk for
potential displacement
§
Lease Tenure Length (n=45)
§Production/Rehearsal venues show increased
vulnerability with 1/3 of venues on lease periods
under 2 years, including the highest rate of month-to-
month leases (13%) across the cohort
§Live Performance venues show slightly better stability,
with 13% on very short terms – however 40% have
leases less than 5 years
§Both budget sizes have similar profiles of leases under
2 years (16-19%), however Small Budget venues have
a substantially greater vulnerability with 61% of leases
under 5 years
Venue operator survey insights
:90
FIGURE 110 Level and Type of Venue Ownership - % of Total Venues (n=62)
FIGURE 111 Lease/License Tenure by Major Type and by Budget Group - % of Category
Leased
from
Private
Owner
Leased
from
Non-
Profit
Leased
from
City of
Calgary
Private
Owner
Non-
Profit
Owner
31% 8% 34% 6% 21%
OWNERSHIP LEASEHOLD
5%
4%
13%
11%
15%
10%
13%
20%
11%
42%
10%
27%
20%
47%
5%
15%
20%
40%
7%
47%
8%
50%
27%
40%
21%
15%
10%
33%
13%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget > $500k (n=19)
Small Budget < $500k (n=26)
Community / Civic (n=10)
Live Performance (n=15)
Presentation (n=5)
Production / Rehearsal (n=15)
Month-to-month 1-2 years 3-5 years 5-10 years Over 10 years Other
Stability of tenure/ownership
§Live Performance venues face the highest
immediate threat with 53% reporting recent
changes/threats to lease, with 13% expecting no
renewal in the next 2 years
§Production/Rehearsal venues show 40%
reporting recent changes/threats to their lease
with 27% expecting no renewal in 2-5 years
§Presentation venues show 40% experiencing
lease threats (2 of 5 venues), with 20% not
expecting renewal in 2-5 years
§Budget sizes indicate similar prevalence of
changes or threats to leases, with 37% - 42% of
venues reporting challenges
§Small Budget venues are facing challenges with
4% reporting immediate threat and 23% at risk
in 2-5 years
§Mid-to-Large Budget venues show a different
vulnerability pattern with higher immediate risk
(16%) but more evenly distributed future risk
(11% each for 2-5 and 5-10 years)
Venue operator survey insights
91
FIGURE 112 Recent Changes/Threats to Lease - % of Category
FIGURE 113 Stability of Lease Tenure - % of Category
37%
42%
20%
53%
40%
40%
63%
58%
80%
47%
60%
60%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget > $500k (n=19)
Small Budget < $500k (n=26)
Community / Civic (n=10)
Live Performance (n=15)
Presentation (n=5)
Production / Rehearsal (n=15)
Yes No
16%
4%
20%
13%
0%
0%
11%
23%
10%
13%
20%
27%
11%
8%
10%
13%
0%
7%
63%
65%
60%
60%
80%
67%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget > $500k (n=19)
Small Budget < $500k (n=26)
Community / Civic (n=10)
Live Performance (n=15)
Presentation (n=5)
Production / Rehearsal (n=15)
No renewal expected within the next 2 yrs No renewal expected over the next 2-5 yrs No renewal expected over the next 5-10 years Secure or renewal expectation for a min. 10 yrs
Stability of tenure/ownership
§Presentation venues show the highest mobility with
60% having leased more than 3 previous buildings
§Production/Rehearsal venues demonstrate significant
movement with 27% having leased more than 3
buildings
§Live Performance venues show instability as well with
20% each having leased 2 buildings and 3-4 buildings
§Community/Civic venues exhibit the most stability
with only 20% having leased multiple buildings
§Small Budget venues show relatively less movement -
27% have leased over 3 buildings and 12% have
leased 2 buildings
§Mid-to-Large Budget venues show higher mobility -
27% have leased over 3 buildings and 32% have
leased 2 buildings
Venue operator survey insights
92
FIGURE 114 Number of Previously Leased Buildings by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Category
16%
4%
10%
40%
7%
11%
23%
10%
20%
20%
20%
32%
12%
20%
40%
27%
26%
12%
40%
13%
13%
16%
50%
40%
47%
33%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget > $500k (n=19)
Small Budget < $500k (n=26)
Community / Civic (n=10)
Live Performance (n=15)
Presentation (n=5)
Production / Rehearsal (n=15)
5 or more buildings 3-4 buildings 2 buildings 1 building None
Expansion plans and capital expenditures
§The largest share of venues planning
significant capital expenditures are by
Presentation (33%) and Live Performance
(28%) spaces - Mid-to-Large Budget venues
lead with 33% planning significant
investments
§A higher proportion of venues planning
moderate upgrades is reported by
Production/Rehearsal spaces (27%) and
Community/ Civic venues (25%) - both
budget categories show approximately 20%
§Small Budget venues show the highest
proportion for planning minor investments
at 49%, followed by Live Performance (44%)
and Production/Rehearsal spaces (41%)
§Maintenance (39%), Physical Accessibility
(25%), and Amenities (22%) upgrades are
the top three categories of capital
expenditures planned by the cohort
§The high rate of ‘Other’ (39%) reflects
comprehensive renovation and capital
projects involving most categories
Venue operator survey insights
93
FIGURE 115 Plans for Expansion or Capital Expenditures (5-10 yrs) - % of Category
FIGURE 116 Focus of Capital Expenditures - % of Total (n=50)
39%
39%
25%
22%
11%
3%
Other
Maintenance upgrades
Physical accessibility upgrades
Amenities upgrades
Technology upgrades
Environmental upgrades
33%
8%
13%
28%
33%
14%
22%
20%
25%
11%
17%
27%
22%
49%
25%
44%
33%
41%
15%
23%
31%
11%
17%
18%
8%
6%
6%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >500k (n=27)
Small Budget <500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Significant capital expenditures Moderate capital expenditures Minor capital expenditures No planned capital expenditures Not sure / Other
Confidence levels for the future
§Live Performance venues face the highest perception of risk with 50% of the
cohort reporting redevelopment/tenure change concerns
§Presentation and Production/Rehearsal venues show similar awareness of risk
levels at 33% and 32% respectively
§Community/Civic venues demonstrate notably lower risk at 13%
§Approximately 1/3 of Small Budget venues report there is a perceived risk to
their operations from redevelopment or tenure change, with a slightly less share
of Mid-Sized to Large Budget organizations (30%) reporting some level of risk
§While there were no reports of venues indicating that operations would cease
in Calgary, there was a slightly lower confidence rate of future operations with
Presentation venues (17% Somewhat Likely) compared to other categories
(ranging from 22% - 25%)
Venue operator survey insights
94
FIGURE 117 Awareness of Risk of Redevelopment or Tenure Change by Major Type and Budget Group - % of Total (n=62)
FIGURE 118 Confidence of Future Operations in in Calgary in 5 Years - % of Category
30%
34%
13%
50%
33%
32%
70%
66%
88%
50%
67%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >500k (n=27)
Small Budget <500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Yes No
78%
77%
75%
78%
83%
77%
22%
23%
25%
22%
17%
23%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mid-Sized to Large Budget >500k (n=27)
Small Budget <500k (n=35)
Community / Civic (n=16)
Live Performance (n=18)
Presentation (n=6)
Production / Rehearsal (n=22)
Very likely Somewhat likely
Good Practices from Peer Cities
5.
Good practice case study criteria
Sources: 96
§Formal Cultural Strategies: an existing cultural plan, cultural infrastructure strategy or
significant research completed on addressing the issue of displacement and affordability
crisis
§Facilities: a diver se ecosystem of cultural consumption and production spaces
§Policy Environment: evidence of municipal policy initiatives dedicated to enabling cultural
infrastructure
§Recognition: nationally/internationally recognized as a creative city
§Creative Space Entrepreneurship: suppor tive of social purpose real estate models for the
cultural and creative industries
§Planning Policies: enabling land use and development incentive policy frameworks
§Funding Programs: capital project and/or venue operating grant programs
§Staff Resources: dedicated municipal teams to advance cultural space
§Capacity Building Initiatives: community leader ship oppor tunities, guidance and toolkits to
support cultural space development
§Municipal Assets: cultural spaces in integrated civic facilities and adaptive reuse of surplus
properties
Criteria for Case Study Selection Primary Research Areas
Good practices – City of Vancouver
Sources 2018 Making Space for Arts and Culture – Cultural Infrastructure Plan, City of Vancouver; 2019 Culture|Shift Blanketing the City in Arts and Culture – Vancouver Culture Plan 2020-2029, City of Vancouver 97
Strategic Objectives
The Making Space for Arts and Culture plan is a comprehensive strategy developed by the City
of Vancouver to address the critical need for affordable and accessible arts and cultural spaces
in the city. The plan integrates with the broader Culture|Shift Blanketing the City in Arts and
Culture plan and the Vancouver Music Strategy with aims to position arts and culture at the
center of city building. The plan outlines a number of interconnected goals:
§Prioritize self-determined Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh, and Urban
Indigenous Spaces
§Prioritize cultural heritage, equity and accessibility
§Remove regulatory barriers and expand tools to enable music and arts events, and to
secure, enhance and develop affordable, accessible arts and cultural spaces
§Expand community partnerships and increase community ownership as well as
supporting a Cultural Land Trust
§Prioritize renewal/enhancement of City-owned cultural facilities
Making Space for Arts and Culture sets a 10-year target to secure 800,000 sq. ft. of new,
repurposed or expanded affordable space. This target includes: 400 units of affordable artist
housing; 650,000 sq. ft. of new or repurposed space; renewal and enhancement of 150,000 sq.
ft. of existing space; and a goal to see “no net loss” of Vancouver’s cultural spaces including
artist studios and music spaces.
Action Priorities
§Community Ownership: Suppor t non-profit space operators to provide affordable space,
establishing a fund for community-led, large scale cultural space projects, and supporting
further planning and development of a community-led cultural land trust, to secure arts
and cultural space in perpetuity
§Designated Spaces: Prioritizing designated community cultural spaces within City-owned
facilities like community centers, libraries and other civic spaces
§Affordable Production and Rehearsal Spaces: Emphasizing the development of affordable
spaces for artists to live, work and share their work
§Music Spaces: Meeting the needs outlined in the Vancouver Music Strategy including
exploring ways to lower barriers to accessing City-owned spaces for music activities (all-
ages opportunities)
§Equity and Redress: The City aims to address the inequitable distribution of and access to
resources, ensuring that diverse communities have opportunities to participate in the arts
and culture - priority is given to organizations representing or serving equity-deserving
artists and communities, and aims to increase investment in these groups
§Zoning Mechanisms: Develop policy to preserve and enhance artist studios, production
spaces, music venues and non-profit arts and cultural spaces within industrial zones and
non-traditional places – explore and develop mechanisms to support affordable non-profit
space in commercial and industrial zones, including density bonusing, commercial linkage
fees, and cultural districts
Good practices – City of Vancouver
Sources: Cultural Spaces Capital Grants – 2025 Information Guide, City of Vancouver; 2024 Cultural Grants (CASC, Capacity, Cultural Spaces) Council Report RTS 16100, City of Vancouver; 2025 Cultural Operating Funding – Annual Information
Guide, City of Vancouver; 2024 Arts and Culture Event License Information Guide, City of Vancouver; 2022 Broadway Plan, City of Vancouver; 2022-2025 Artist Studio Award Program Information Guide, City of Vancouver; 2021 Artist Studio
Guidelines, City of Vancouver; 2022 Live-work Use Guidelines, City of Vancouver; 2023 Industrial Spaces Guidelines, City of Vancouver; 2023 Arts and Culture Event Site Management Plan Kit, City of Vancouver 98
Key Tools and Policies
§Cultural Spaces and Infrastructure Team – dedicated cultural planning staff that help to
secure, enhance, and develop affordable and accessible cultural spaces - they work with
communities, plan and regulate spaces, and support organizations with infrastructure and
grants
§Cultural Operating Funding - provides core funding to Vancouver-based, professional non-
profit arts, cultural and creative organizations that have a mission to develop, create,
produce, present and disseminate artistic work or provide professional services or space
for the benefit of the local arts and culture sector, in any artistic discipline
§Grants do not exceed 50% of an applicant’s current revenues and generally range from $15,000 -
$150,000.
§Artist Studio Awards Program: since 1995, the Artist Studio Award program has provided
up to seven studio spaces (both live-work and work-only) to support artists and their
practice at below-market rates (artists are responsible for associated occupancy costs)
over 3 to 4 year terms – over the last three years, all City-owned studios were dedicated
to low-income, Vancouver-based artists who are Indigenous or racialized, prioritizing
Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh ar tists
§Arts and Culture Event License: Expanding opportunities for events beyond spaces
designed for assembly use, this new license makes it easier to host pop-up performances
in unconventional spaces for up to six days per month, per building including artist studios,
production and rehearsal studios, retail, (e.g. galleries and cafes), factories, wholesale and
warehouses, offices and adjoining outdoor spaces (i.e. parking lot, patio, or garden)
§Cultural Infrastructure Grants: The City provides matching capital grants to support
planning, research, acquisition, renovation, or expansion of non-profit arts and cultural
facilities; the grants are intended to improve the quality and capacity of existing facilities
and can fund upgrades such as accessibility improvements or electrical/plumbing upgrades;
§Matching grants provide up to $250,000 for capital projects related to cultural spaces
§The City has provided approximately $15 million in capital cultural spaces funding since 2009
through this program, which has leveraged $90 million in improvements to Vancouver based
cultural spaces
§The City prioritizes projects that align with the goals of Making Space for Arts and Culture, including
reconciliation, decolonization, cultural equity, and accessibility
§Affordable Spaces Grants: The City offers operating grants to non-profit space operators
who provide subsidized affordable cultural space for artists and cultural organization -
these grants help cover facility operating costs, and are prioritized for spaces that serve
multiple artists and/or organizations, or cultural communities most at risk of displacement
§The maximum funding request is limited to $40,000 for organizations with annual operating
expenses of more than $250,000 and to $25,000 for organizations with annual operating
expenses of $250,000 or less
§Critical Assistance Grants: These grants provide up to $25,000 to support urgent repairs or
upgrades to non-profit cultural spaces facing critical situations due to facility emergencies or life-safety
issues - the goal is to ensure access to safe, legal, and fully functioning cultural spaces
§The grants address unforeseen and urgent replacement, repairs, hiring of code consultants for
time-sensitive projects, and permit fee assistance
§Toolkits and Guidance: The City has produced a number of guidelines have been produced to
improve the design and function of artist studios, live-work use, industrial spaces and cultural events
Good practices – City of Vancouver
Sources: 2024 Report Back on Council Motion for Declaration of an East Side Arts District (RTS 13778), City of Vancouver; 2024/25 Theatre Rental Grants Information Guide, 2025 City of Vancouver; Cultural Spaces Affordable Spaces Information
Guide; Development Potential, Property Assessment and Taxation – Information for Independent Business, Arts, Culture and Non-Profit Tenants, City of Vancouver; 2022 Seizing the Moment – Establishing the Eastside Arts District; 2023 False
Creek Flats Area Plan, City of Vancouver; 2024 Chinatown Cultural District Framework, City of Vancouver; 2024 Cultural Grants (CASC, Capacity, Cultural Spaces) Council Report RTS 16100, City of Vancouver 99
Key Tools and Policies (cont’d)
§Small Grants for Cultural Spaces: The City offer s small grants for planning, research, minor
capital projects (building improvements and accessibility upgrades), mentorships and
capacity building related to cultural spaces - these grants are designed to be accessible to
organizations that may not be ready for larger capital projects and aim to support a
diversity of cultural spaces
§Provide up to $25,000 for smaller, time-sensitive projects related to cultural spaces
§Theatre Rental Grants: The City offer s in-kind grants to subsidize the rental of civic
performance venues including the Orpheum, Annex, Queen Elizabeth Theatre and
Vancouver Playhouse – the program reduces some of the costs when using the Vancouver
Civic Theatres including Council approved rental rates, front of house labour, in-house
technical equipment and some technical labour (Head Carpenter, Head Electrician and
Head Sound)
§Chinatown Cultural Infrastructure Grants: Provides additional funding for larger projects
in Chinatown, such as renovations and upgrades to heritage buildings - these grants
support the goals of the Chinatown Cultural Heritage Assets Management Plan, including
preserving and celebrating Chinatown's cultural heritage
§Development Potential Relief Program Pilot: Designed to alleviate high proper ty taxes for
eligible independent businesses, arts, culture and non-profit organizations (located in
particular Light Industry and Business zones. The program offers tax relief on the portion
of land value attributed to unrealized development potential, which is typically included in
property assessments, making it difficult for these businesses to remain viable
§Cultural Districts: The City is working to identify districts where there exists a high
concentration of arts and cultural production or presentation spaces, and develop tools
for their protection such as property tax abatement, operating funding, community-owned
space (secured through development contributions) and removing regulatory barriers; the
City has developed a Chinatown Cultural District Framework as a pilot approach to
supporting the vitality of the National Historic Site and is working on forming the Eastside
Arts District
§Development Cost Levy Reduction: Development Cost Levies are collected from most
new development to help pay for facilities made necessary by growth and are applied on a
per sq. ft. basis. - the City has reduced the rate for new cultural facilities to $10/building
permit for projects including artist studios; galleries; halls; museums or archives; live
theatres; and production or rehearsal studios for dance, music or drama
§
Vancouver Cultural Spaces Fund
: An interest-bearing reserve to support the
development of large-scale community-led cultural space projects to research, plan,
develop, and acquire affordable cultural spaces – the City Launched the fund with $4.8
million and future funding to be secured through development contributions
§Cultural Land Trust: The City has supported the research and feasibility work on the
development of a cultural land trust through a $200,000 grant to 221A, a non-profit
organization that aims to protect and preserve affordable spaces for artists and cultural
organizations by purchasing and managing land, providing long-term leases and stable rent
§
Local Area Plans
: Integrating ar ts and culture as a key priority into City planning work is
ongoing with notable policy goals for the retention, creation and expansion of affordable
industrial arts production and cultural spaces for the longer term in local area plans
Good practices – City of Vancouver
Sources: 2022 Vancouver Citywide Community Centre Strategy, Parks Board; 2024 Community Amenity Contributions Policy for Rezonings, City of Vancouver; 2024 Density Bonus Contributions Bulletin, City of Vancouver 100
Key Tools and Policies (cont’d)
§
Density Bonus Zoning (DPZs) Contribution
: DPZ establishes a base maximum density
that may be exceeded, within defined limits, in exchange for cash contributions toward
public amenities identified through area planning - the demands for new amenities
(including cultural facilities) and affordable housing resulting from new development are
outlined within each community plan’s Public Benefit Strategy
§
Community Amenity Contributions
(CACs): CACs are voluntary contributions from
council approved rezonings, offered by developers either as in-kind amenities (delivered
onsite as part of the new development) or as cash-in-lieu contributions to infrastructure –
eligible uses include affordable housing, heritage, libraries, artist studios, rehearsal spaces,
cultural/social hubs, cultural non-profit office spaces, theatres, galleries and music spaces
§
Community Centres
: Community centres offer a wide range of ar ts and cultural programs
in Vancouver, from the public art murals that adorn many facades to performances, art
classes, potter studios and theatre classes, to artist residencies, cultural landmarks and
festival – where appropriate, the Parks Board is working to integrate cultural infrastructure
into new and renovated community centres
Good practices – City of Toronto
Sources: Culture Connects: An Action Plan for Culture in Toronto 2024-2035, City of Toronto; 2024 Culture Connects Staff Report for Action, City of Toronto 101
Strategic Objectives
Completed in 2024, the Culture Connects Action Plan for Culture in Toronto (2025-2035) is the
City’s new 10 year strategy for the cultural sector and is shaped by five guiding principles:
§Centre Indigenous Cultures and Creativity
§Prioritize Equity and Access
§Champion Artists, Creatives and Creative Industries
§Attract and Build for Audiences
§Foster Innovation and Enable Creativity
‘Culture Everywhere’ is one of four priority areas articulated in the plan – it addresses the
persistent challenge of ensuring safe, accessible and affordable cultural space by outlining
actions to protect and grow cultural infrastructure across Toronto, with a focus on ensuring
cultural space throughout the city as an essential component of complete communities.
The City's Office of Creative Space is tasked with developing a long-term strategy to invest in
cultural facilities city-wide. This strategy will help to guide the implementation of the ‘Culture
Everywhere’ priority, informed by community needs and best practices, to deliver one million
sq. ft. of new cultural space over the next decade.
Action Priorities
§Identifying Cultural Space Needs: Identify specific neighborhoods and equity seeking that
are in need of cultural infrastructure, focused on data collection and community
engagement to understand where gaps in cultural spaces exist
§Protecting Existing Cultural Spaces: Safeguard existing cultural spaces from displacement
through expansion of property tax exemptions
§Unlocking Public and Private Spaces: Make more spaces available for cultural uses by
leveraging both public and private spaces for meanwhile use
§Explore and Support Alternative Models for Space Ownership and Operation:
investigate land trusts and other community ownership models, particularly in relation to
supporting self-determined cultural spaces for Indigenous communities
§Supporting Diverse Types of Cultural Spaces: The Plan recognizes the need for a variety
of cultural space types, ranging from large institutions to smaller, community-based venues
- this includes spaces for performances, exhibitions, community gatherings, cultural
production and hybrid cultural spaces, as well as spaces for collaboration and emerging
cultural expressions
§Implementing a Cultural Districts Program: The City plans to establish and deliver a city-
wide Cultural Districts Program
Good practices – City of Toronto
Sources:2024 Annual Report on City’s Loans and Loan Guarantee Portfolios, City of Toronto; www.toronto.ca/business-economy/business-operation-growth/business-incentives/creative-co-location-facilities-property-tax-subclass-designation/; 2024
Community Benefits Charge Strategy, City of Toronto; 2022 Community Benefits Charge By-Law 1139-2022, City of Toronto; 2020 Community Space Tenancy Policy, City of Toronto; www.toronto.ca/community-people/get-
involved/community/community-space-tenancy/community-space-tenancy-map; 2022 Nominal Lease Agreement with It’s OK Community Arts Council Report, City of Toronto 102
Key Tools and Policies
§Creative Co-Location Facilities Property Tax Subclass
:
A program that provides property
tax relief (up to 50% reduction) to eligible properties that support the city’s creative
enterprises and live music venues, including:
§Te n a n t -Based Operating Model (minimum net rentable area of 10,000 sq. ft.) - a qualifying
property must have creative enterprises as tenants that are charged a below average market rent
(at least 30% lower than average market net rent for similar space), that produce cultural goods
and/or provide cultural services; eligible creative enterprises can be either not-for-profit or for-
profit entities
§Membership-Based Co-Working Model (minimum work and common space area of 5,000 sq. ft.)
- a membership based co-working facility is a type of work space where self-employed individuals
or small enterprises (the members) use a shared office or other physical work environment on a
membership basis as opposed to a lease arrangement
§Live Music Venues: A maximum capacity of no more than 1,500 person venue in which live music
performances occur, having a minimum of four amenities or types of equipment (e.g. fixed stage or
stage area; sound booth or desk with sound board; audio equipment; performance or stage
lighting)
§Community Benefits Charge (CBC): A growth funding tool that allows the City to collect
fees on certain higher-density developments to fund capital infrastructure needs related to
development (replaces the former Section 37 height and density bonusing in the Planning
Act) – the charge applies to developments that are five or more stories and contain 10 or
more residential units (to a maximum of 4% of land value), delivering community facilities
such as community arts hubs, cultural centres, museums and libraries, as well as affordable
housing
§Community Space Tenancy Policy: Through a Request for Expressions of Interest process,
the City provides space to non-profit community and cultural organizations at below-
market rent (typically ‘nominal’ basis) through three types of tenancies:
§Community Partner Tenancy is intended to support standard tenancies for single organizations
that provide community services
§Community Hub Tenancy is intended to support a variety of services and programs, with three or
more Tenants co-located with intentional service and program integration
§Incubator Tenancy supports non-profit organizations with shared space within a Community
Partner or Community Hub Tenancy to build organizational capacity and develop programs to
meet a new or emerging community need
Te na nt s ar e t y p i c a l ly re sp o n si bl e fo r t h e i r pr o po r t i o n a t e s h a re o f bu i l di ng o pe r a t in g co st s
and capital "fit up" costs beyond base building provided by the developer – in most
situations, property taxes are exempted due to designation as a Municipal Capital Facility
§Community Space Tenancy online map: Updated quarterly, a Community Space Tenancy
Map provides stakeholders, including members of the public, with information and
resources related to the Community Space Tenancy portfolio managed by Real Estate
Services
§Interim Use Lease of City-Owned Property for Music Rehearsal: a pilot interim use
program to identify an inventory of City-owned properties suitable for not-for-profit
and/or for-profit rehearsal studio and production space operators, leased at below-market
rates
Good practices – City of Toronto
Sources: 2022 Music Industry Strategy 2022-2026, City of Toronto; Culture connects Workplan for 2025-2027, City of Toronto; www.toronto.ca/news/city-of-toronto-protects-vital-workspaces-at-youngplace-for-former-artscape-tenants/ 103
Key Tools and Policies (cont’d)
§Office of Creative Space: A unit established in 2022 within the City’s Economic
Development and Culture department to coordinate inter-divisional work in identifying,
advocating for, and allocating space for culture
§Toronto Music Directory: An interactive map and searchable catalogue of local music
industry services, retailers, supporting organizations and venues (including alternative
spaces, rehearsal/recording studios, instrument stores and record shops)
§Loan/Line of Credit Guarantees: The City provides line of credit guarantees to eligible
non-profit cultural and community organizations that have an existing financial relationship
with the City (recipients of operating grants) – the guarantees provide operational
support to obtain lines of credit for working capital purposes or to provide capital loans
to acquire or upgrade community facilities (limited to a maximum of $10 million)
§Cultural Land Trusts: the City suppor ted the transition of the former facility por tfolio of
Toronto Artscape (entered receivership in 2024) to various non-profits (including the
successor entity, ArtHubs Toronto) to sustain affordable spaces for artists and cultural
organizations; the City has also enabled the founding of the Community and Cultural
Spaces Trust through a brokered financial settlement between the community and the
developers of former public school lands – more recently, the City has also helped secure
(strata-title purchase) of 6 additional non-profit spaces in a former Toronto Artscape
facility
§Regulatory Changes to support the Night Time Economy: In 2023, City Council
approved By-law amendments to modernize current zoning and business licensing
regulations that are coming into effect in 2025, notably:
§Increased permitted maximum areas that bars and restaurants can use for entertainment
§Allowances for nightclubs outside of the downtown area
§New business license types and requirements for eating and entertainment establishments (i.e.,
restaurants, bars, nightclubs, live music venues)
§Cultural Districts planning: The program (in development) will bring together cultural
planning tools with land use approaches to direct intentional investment of resources,
services and programs to support small businesses, cultural spaces and heritage within
areas meaningful to communities
§$365,000 and 1 FTE has been approved by Council for program start-up from 2025-2027
§Multi-Year Operating Funding: Various multi-year funding programs administered by the
City of Toronto (Cultural Organization Operating Partnership Program) and Toronto Arts
Foundation support non-profit organization operations, including venue expenses.
Providing affordable spaces for other artists or arts organizations has been identified by
the City as one of the unique roles in the cultural ecosystem that has been funded.
Good practices – City of Montreal
* A new draft action plan for 2025-2030 is in development however has not been approved at the time of this report completion
Sources: 2017-2022 Cultural Development Policy – Combining Creativity and the Citizen Cultural Experience in the Age of Digital Technology and Diversity, City of Montreal 104
Strategic Objectives
The 2017-2022 Cultural Development Policy* is a framework developed by the City of
Montreal that articulates a vision for the city as a ‘cultural metropolis’. The overarching goal is
to solidify and enhance Montreal's reputation as a major international cultural center:
§
Citizen Engagement and Cultural Democracy
: A central focus is on ensuring that all
Montrealers, regardless of background, have access to and participate in cultural life
§Support for Artists and Creative Entrepreneurship: Provide support to artists, artisans,
and cultural entrepreneurs to ensure the long-term viability of creativity
§Cultural Quarters and Territorial Equity: A key strategy is the development and
animation of cultural quarters throughout the city - the goal is to ensure equitable access
to culture across all neighborhoods
§
Digital Technology and Innovation:
Embracing digital technologies to enhance cultural
experiences, reach broader audiences, and position Montreal as a leader in digital creativity
§Heritage Preservation and Enhancement: Recognizes the impor tance of tangible and
intangible heritage in shaping Montreal's identity and promoting social cohesion
§Inclusion and Equity: Prioritizing inclusion and equity in all cultural initiatives, ensuring that
diverse voices are represented and that cultural opportunities are accessible to all
residents, including those with disabilities and special needs
§Sustainability: Integrating sustainable development principles into cultural planning
§Role of Libraries and Cultural Centers (Maisons de la culture): Reinforce their vital role
as community hubs providing access to knowledge, culture and social connection
Action Priorities
§Cultural Quarters: Implement cultural quarters centred around cultural facilities, libraries,
creative places, production sites and venues – local cultural action plans establish the
framework for development and the Acces culture network and libraries are key players in
their deployment
§Integrating Culture into Urban Planning: Incorporating cultural and heritage
considerations into planning, housing and mobility projects.
§Engaging Indigenous Communities: Giving greater importance to indigenous expertise in
the development of cultural and heritage projects
§Commercial Venues: Help maintain the competitiveness of venues that play a primary role
in providing access to various cultural expressions and the development of artists
§Artist Studios: Continue the preservation and development of artist studios throughout
the city and increase the number available
§Public Libraries Network: Contribute to the development of an inclusive and engaged
community by renewing the 21st-century library experience for citizens
§Cultural recreational activities and amateur arts: Adapt the range of activities to
Montréal’s demographic realities - improve facilities dedicated to amateur arts and
promote access to music studios, rehearsal halls and exhibition halls
§Acces culture network (Maison de la culture): modernize the portfolio through digital
equipment improvement of the Acces culture network’s performance halls
§Quartier des spectacles: maintain status as the cultural focal point of the metropolis
Good practices – City of Montreal
Sources: Cultural Real Estate Project Support Program Guide: Second Edition, Conseil des arts de Montréal; 2022 Les Maisons de la culture Vision de development 2022-2030, City of Montreal; 2025 Support Program – Grant for Artists in Visual
Arts and Crafts, City of Montreal; 2025 Support for the Renovation of Buildings Housing Artists’ Studios – Program Guide, City of Montreal; 2017-2022 Cultural Development Policy – Combining Creativity and the Citizen Cultural Experience in the
Age of Digital Technology and Diversity, City of Montreal 105
Key Tools and Policies
§Support Program for the Renovation of Artists’ Studio Buildings: The $30 million
program provides financial support for the renovation, construction or expansion of a
building housing artists' studios in the visual arts and crafts through a grant program –
considerations include:
§Must be a building (or part of a building) of at least 5,000 sq. ft. into affordable artist studios
§NPOs must guarantee that the use of the studios will be maintained for 20 years, regardless of
the type of occupation
§Eligibility is for professional non-profit cultural organizations or non-profit property entities that
develop and operate real estate projects
§Financial support for 90% of eligible expenses relating to renovation, construction or expansion
work on the real estate project have a maximum amount of approximately $3.7 million
§Financial support to subsidize the studies and specialized services required for the implementation
of the project (e.g. architecture, engineering, etc.) have a maximum contribution of $350,000
§Financial support for stabilization of the artists’ studio project including subsidy of part of the
operating costs during the construction period ($2.50/sq. ft. up to 12 months for a maximum
amount of $100,000); a reimbursement grant corresponding to the increase in general property
taxes following the carrying out work (a period of three years for a maximum amount of
$190,000 per fiscal year, per project)
§Cultural Real Estate Project Support Program: This technical program suppor ts ar tists,
collectives and cultural organizations in the development and sustainability of their creative
spaces projects through access to a technical resource group, comprised of non-profit
organizations with significant affordable housing and community facility development
experience
§Artists in Visual Arts and Crafts – Studio Support Program: Jointly managed by the City
of Montreal and the Conseil des arts de Montreal, the program provides financial support
to professional artists, tenant or owners of a studio space (building or part of the building)
in a non-residential building
§The amount is calculated proportionally the number of days during which the space is occupied
as an artist's studio
§The rate is approximately $1.20/sq. ft. per year for the part dedicated to research and creation
and $0.28/sq. ft. per year for the part dedicated to storage
§Preliminary Needs and Feasibility Study Support Program: Supports the development of
cultural facilities by partially supporting the financing of pre-feasibility, feasibility, functional
planning and impact studies required for redevelopment or construction projects involving
a non-profit developer that is a professional cultural organization
§Fundraising Assistance Program: Supports the planning, organization and implementation
of fundraising activities for the construction, renovation and maintenance of non-profit
professional cultural facilities – eligible expenses include professional fees for specialized
consultants and the hiring of non-permanent employees specifically assigned to fundraising
activity
§Financial assistance up to $25,000 per study and a targeted project budget of at least $250,000
§Les Maison de la culture (‘Houses of Culture”) and Bibliothèques de Montreal
modernizations: a network of 26 maison de la culture and 45 libraries are being invested
as the backbone of a next-generation municipal cultural network, many of which will offer
mixed facilities that combine library, cultural and/or community spaces
Good practices – City of Montreal
Sources: 2017-2022 Cultural Development Policy – Combining Creativity and the Citizen Cultural Experience in the Age of Digital Technology and Diversity, City of Montreal; 2020 Signing a Commercial or Residential Lease to Set Up Your Studio:
Artists’ Rights and Obligations, le Conseil des arts de Montréal; 2020 Finance a Cultural Real Estate Project – Guide for the Montreal Artistic Community, le Conseil des arts de Montréal 106
Key Tools and Policies (cont’d)
§Cultural District planning: The development of cultural districts is a priority of the 2017-
2022 Cultural Development Policy, but also of the 2020-2030 Climate Plan, and it is par t of
the vision of the Montreal 2030 strategic plan – the objectives of the program include:
§to develop quality local cultural offerings
§to consolidate places of creation and presentation (artists' and craftswomen’s studios,
performance halls and exhibition spaces)
§to create synergies between the actors of the territory (residents, artists, artisans, cultural and
community organizations, schools, business owners, etc.)
§to ensure that citizens are at the heart of these developments and are actively involved in them
§Artist Studio Provision: To m e e t t h e n e e d s o f M o n t r e a l ’s a r t i s t i c c o m m u n i t y, t h e C o n s e i l
provides four studios for artistic research, creation and rehearsal: two for dance, one for
music and one for multidisciplinary use on an hourly basis
§Artist Space Guidebooks: The Conseil des arts de Montreal produced a series of practical
guides and videos on financing cultural real estate projects, leasing artist studio spaces and
developing collective studio projects
Good practices – City of Austin
Sources: 2018 Thriving in Place – Supporting Austin’s Cultural Vitality Through Place-based Economic Development, City of Austin; 2018 The CAMP Report, City of Austin; 2016 Music and Creative Ecosystem Stabilization Recommendations, City
of Austin; 107
Strategic Objectives
From 2016-2018, a series of successive reports were produced by the City of Austin that
articulated similar objectives related to supporting and sustaining Austin’s cultural spaces and
creative ecosystem:
§Affordable and Accessible Creative Space: rising costs and development pressures
threaten the availability of affordable spaces for artists and creative businesses, potentially
leading to displacement
§Cultural District Development and Preservation: recognizing, supporting, and promoting
areas with a high concentration of cultural resources and activities
§Revenue Development and Economic Stability for Creatives: musicians and creatives face
challenges related to stagnating income and financial sustainability
§Cultural Tourism: leveraging Austin's cultural assets to attract tourists and bring new
resources to the community
§Permitting and Regulatory Reform: streamlining permitting processes and regulations for
live music venues and creative spaces
Action Priorities
§Land Use Regulations: Implement strategies to address land development codes to
encourage the development of a broad range of creative spaces
§Public/Private Partnerships: Promote the establishment of music and creative industry
hubs through these partnerships to boost local industry capabilities
§Incentives, Tools, and Loans: Explore and re-imagine existing City development tools, such
as tax incentives, regulations and bond financing options, with a focus on creative
industries’ facility needs - expand access to affordable and functional studio, exhibition,
performance space, museums, libraries, music venues and office space
§Identify and support cultural districts: Develop a consistent framework for identification
and cultivation of cultural districts, including internal and external stakeholder participation
and appropriate incentives for community partnerships
§Local Area Planning: Incorporating creative space preservation, music, and art into small
area plans, including neighborhood plans, corridor plans and commercial area plans
§Surplus City Land: Positioning appropriate surplus City-owned property for
redevelopment into creative space through public/private partnerships
Good practices – City of Austin
Sources: 2018 Response to Council Resolution (Community arts Stabilization Trust), AEDC; 2024 Ordinance Amending City; 2024 C20-2023-026: Live Music and Creative Space Bonus Phase 2, City of Austin; 2023 AEDC Interlocal Cooperation
Agreement, City of Austin 108
Key Tools and Policies
§Austin Cultural Trust: Created and managed by Austin Economic Development
Corporation (AEDC) and supported by a community advisory committee, the Cultural
Tr ust is dedicated to the acquisition and preser vation of ar ts, cultur al and music spaces - it
can accept philanthropic donations, utilize revenue bond financing, manage private
investments and engage in public real estate and public/private partnerships on behalf of
the City, with the following objectives:
§Facilitate the acquisition and preservation of existing cultural arts and music venues as well as the
creation of new cultural arts and music venues to help support displaced organizations – 5
investments in cultural spaces since 2022
§Achieve diversity, equity and inclusion, including by addressing past inequities experienced by
underserved, under-represented and marginalized individuals and groups
§Provide permanent affordability for cultural and creative purposes
§Create a sustaining pipeline of Cultural Trust infrastructure as funding sources continue to become
available
The first round of investments was sourced from a $12 million Creative Spaces Bond
Fund, $2.4 million from the Hotel Occupancy Tax and $5 million from a City general fund
allocation – future leveraged funding sources include loans, social impact investments,
grants, and various tax credit opportunities available in the U.S. (e.g. Low Income Housing
Ta x Cr e d i t , N e w Ma r k e t s Ta x C re di ts )
§Live Music Venue and Creative Space Density Bonus: The City created a density bonus
and district program to support live music and creative space districts as well as the
preservation and incentivization of affordable creative space – the key regulations include:
§Bonus is available city-wide in areas that include existing or planned clusters of creative space use
structures and sites
§Creative space uses are defined as Art Gallery, Art Workshop, Cocktail Lounge; Performance
Venue; Personal Improvement Ser vices (including Ar tist Studios); and Theater
§At least 25% of ground floor gross leasable area in the building must be dedicated to affordable
creative space
§The developer must redevelop the site to replace all existing creative spaces with spaces of
comparable size and must grant a creative space operator the option to lease a creative space of
comparable size following the completion of redevelopment
§Requires an affordable lease for the the creative space operator for ten years (defines affordable
creative space as the lesser of 50% of average retail space rent, or a fixed ratio of annual revenues
considered typical of and sustainable for the type of creative space) and limits year-over-year rent
escalation to 5% or less for any creative space tenant
§‘Agent of Change’ regulation requires residential and hotel developments within 600 feet of an
outdoor music venue and within 300 feet of a performance venue in the creative district to
conduct a sound assessment and disclose to future residents when they sell or lease units that
there is a venue nearby and that a sound assessment has been completed
Good practices – City of Austin
Sources: www.austintexas.gov/creative-space-assistance-program; 2024 Maximizing Impact – A Comprehensive Evaluation of Programs Funded by Austin’s Hotel Occupancy Tax Revenue, Measure; 2024 Ordinance Amending City; 2024 C20-
2023-026: Live Music and Creative Space Bonus Phase 2, City of Austin; 2023 Live Music Venue and Creative Space Definitions, City of Austin 109
Key Tools and Policies (cont’d)
§Land Use Amendments: A series of changes to the Land Development Code with the
purpose to help mitigate rent and displacement pressure on creative spaces and live music
venues by better defining these uses and permitting them in more zones:
§Live/Work – revise ‘Personal Improvement Services’ to allow for creative activities; revise “Home
Occupations’ to facilitate more flexibility of creative space; allow for accessory structures like
detached home studios
§Theater – expand potential base zones for theatres
§Live Music Venues – expand the number of zones that allow venues and create a distinct
Performance Venue land use requiring a minimum of 50% of gross floor area for creative
production and programming space
§Creative Space Assistance Program: The program offers awards between $5,000 and
$50,000 to commercial creative spaces (either a Live Music Venue, Performance
Venue/Theater or Museum/Ar t Galler y) facing displacement or new leases at higher and
unaffordable rates - grant funds may be used for:
§Gap Financing for Property Acquisition – includes down payment assistance or gap financing for
projects that demonstrate a high degree of project readiness
§Rent Stipend – Up to 30% of base commercial rent, not to exceed $50,000 over a 12-month
period
§Other Space-Related Needs – includes such facility improvements as architectural or project plans
and displacement-related expenses
§Downtown Austin Space Activation (DASA): Managed by the Downtown Austin Alliance
Foundation, the program connects artists, artisans, musicians, entrepreneurs and creatives
with donated space and resources
§Economic and Cultural District Framework Policy: Economic and Cultural Districts
(ECD) are contiguous geographic areas containing concentrations of creative, cultural,
entertainment, heritage, or commercial assets that contribute to neighborhood supportive
commerce and/or place based storytelling and identity - to support their growth and
vitality, the City offers a range of programs and resources:
§Ombudsman Support - this program provides a liaison between districts and City processes,
procedures, programs and resources
§Tr aining/Or ganizational Resources - access to organizational training and legal resources to help
districts operate effectively
§Cultural Asset Mapping Project - helps communities engage in cultural planning and gain a deeper
understanding of Austin’s creative ecosystems
§Equitable Cultural District Funding Model - provides districts with financial support to promote
accessibility, address disparities, support diversity and inclusion, mobilize marginalized communities,
ensure sustainability, foster collaboration and promote economic development
§Public Improvement District (PID) - through self-imposed tax assessments on property owners,
PIDs can fund infrastructure improvements and economic development initiatives
§Historic District Designation - supports the preservation of Austin’s historic buildings, structures,
and sites
§Creative District Overlay - offers voluntary development bonuses for providing affordable
commercial space in new developments or contributing to a fund for preserving creative space
within a creative district
§Ta x In cr em en t Fi na nc in g/ Ta x I n c r em en t Re inve st me nt Z o n e ( TI F/ TI RZ ) - TIF is a financing tool that
redirects a portion of property taxes from a designated TIRZ to fund improvements in that zone
§Special Revenue Funds - these funds, established through specific impact fees, support place-based
economic development initiatives within districts
Proposed Framework for Action
6.
AEA’s analysis of the strategy landscape related to cultural space development in Calgary over
the last two decades has illustrated
a consistent, yet largely unrealized, demand to support
communities of artists and small to mid-sized organizations
with a network of cultural
production spaces and multi-functional venues across a spectrum of typologies and geography.
Calgary has experienced significant investment in cultural spaces over the past two decades,
with
approximately $2 billion invested in enhanced facilities by 2028
. The Cultural Municipal
Sustainability Initiative (CMSI) program allocated
$165 million to 17 projects, leveraging
5.77x the program investment
. However, this two-decade investment has been heavily
focused on large anchor institutions, with seven major projects absorbing over 75% of the
available CMSI funding.
Calgary’s cultural spaces are facing growing instability, with 212 cultural spaces lost since
2016 and another 79 forced to relocate.
Commercial occasional venues such as grassroots
live music venues and training facilities (e.g. dance, theatre, music schools) have faced the most
volatility.
Many valued cultural spaces remain at risk
, par ticular ly in central Calgar y, due to
factors such as lack of property ownership, lease terminations and redevelopment pressure.
Significant challenges for arts and culture business models - evident even before the various
economic and natural crises impacting Calgary over the last 20 years – have been intensified
and laid bare during the pandemic closures and slow recovery. Evidenced in the operating
analysis and survey of venue-based organizations,
financial challenges are pervasive across the
sector.
Over two-thirds of consumption-focused venues show financial operating profiles at
medium to high risk of insolvency. While some venues have seen improvements in their
financial outlooks, there is
a growing gap between profitable and unprofitable venues
. Self-
sufficiency has declined across most facility types since 2019, with earned revenue yet to
recover to pre-pandemic levels for many venues.
Drivers for change overview
111
AEA’s research also notes the
declining trends in senior government funding and
philanthropy
levels. Provincial and federal multi-year grant funding is losing ground to inflation,
although Calgary Arts Development grant funding to venue-based organizations has increased.
Individual charitable donations in Calgary have grown over the past 25 years, but the
percentage of tax filers who donate has declined to a 25-year low. Corporate giving and
sponsorships have also declined and become more competitive, with the largest budget
organizations experiencing significant drops in corporate revenue.
The issue of
substantial deferred maintenance and lack of capital funding for cultural venues
in Calgary is a significant challenge. Infrastructure-related problems and deferred maintenance
are prevalent across the sector, with many venues struggling to address critical upgrades and
repairs. The impact of these maintenance and funding issues is evident in the poor quality
ratings self-reported for various aspects of ‘assembly’ spaces. To address these pressing needs,
venues are anticipating significant capital expenditures in the next 5-10 years. The focus of
these anticipated capital expenditures is primarily on maintenance, physical accessibility, and
amenities upgrades. However, without adequate access to capital funding, many of these
necessary improvements may remain unaddressed, potentially compromising the long-term
viability and physical accessibility of Calgary’s cultural spaces.
Unlike many peer cities,
the private sector is largely absent in Calgary from collaborative
partnerships with the cultural sector
to support the delivery of new infrastructure. Calgary’s
policies and programs that are designed to incentivize property sector participation in
delivering community assets have not been effective – in addition to the lack of a ‘carrot’, the
City charter does not allow for the deployment of a ‘stick’ such as inclusive zoning. Without
these mechanisms,
delivering social purpose real estate will require new capabilities and
approaches that leverage institutional, non-profit and civic partnerships
.
In the context of these challenging headwinds facing Calgary, as well as the aspirations for
culture’s role in shaping the city’s future livability, there is a renewed urgency to recalibrate
how Calgary Arts Development, City of Calgary, Province of Alberta, Government of Canada,
and the private sector, collaborate with creative communities to:
§support and leverage existing investments in the ecosystem of both cultural consumption
and production spaces across Calgary
§enable effective leadership, resources and partnerships in the development and operations
of Calgary’s next generation of cultural facilities
Proposed framework for action
112
Based on AEA’s current state analysis and engagement with stakeholders, eight interconnected
strategic priorities and related actions are proposed to align with Council and administration
cycles over the next 10 years:
1. Retain and strengthen existing infrastructure
2. Build cross-sector capacity to advance projects
3. Resource internal advocacy, stewardship and delivery
4. Improve access to capital project funding and affordable financing
5. Shape cultural space provision through local area planning
6. Integrate culture into new social infrastructure
7. Centre the needs of artist communities
8. Scale and amplify social purpose real estate models
Key Insights
The post-pandemic landscape has presented significant challenges for art, cultural and creative
organizations that operate facilities. While they are rebounding in terms of public programming
intensity and employing artists, these enterprises are grappling with a complex and
interconnected set of issues that threaten their financial stability and long-term viability.
As Calgary’s existing venues and spaces navigate the path to recovery and greater
inclusiveness, they face a transformed environment where audience/user behaviors, funding
mechanisms and operational costs have all undergone substantial shifts. The grantee data
analysis and venue survey paint a mixed picture of resilience, adaptation and persistent
challenges.
Proposed framework for action
113
Based on the substantive role venues play in the ecosystem and the unprecedented challenges
impacting facility-based organizations, there is a compelling case emerging for exploring
investment in a new annual facility operating grant to stabilize operating budgets, reduce
financial vulnerability, address deferred maintenance and improve access to subsidized space
for the sector.
Equally critical to supporting the operational sustainability of the sector is to maintain the
ongoing property tax exemption for non-profits in Calgary. The COPTER program is currently
being reviewed by the Province, requiring advocacy to ensure the successful program
continues.
Strategic Priority 1: Retain and strengthen existing venues
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Live Performance Spaces
Presentation Spaces
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
FIGURE 119 Total Number of Public Activities in Calgary 2019 - 2023
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
20 19 20 20 20 21 20 22 20 23
Live Performance Spaces
Presentation Spaces
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
FIGURE 120 Total Number of Artists Employed 2019 - 2023
Supporting the critical role of existing venues
Based on the programming activity intensity reported by
Calgary Arts Development’s full grantee database in
2023, Purpose Built venues support and deliver a large
and diverse volume of activity for Calgarians and the arts
and culture sector.
42% of annual program activity is delivered from these
critical spaces, equal to the utilization of Repurposed
Spaces (13%), Community Spaces (18%) and Education
Spaces (12%) combined.
While arts programming is delivered through a spectrum
of infrastructure across the city, disciplines that require
specialized facilities with specific technical requirements,
spatial configurations or equipment that cannot be easily
replicated in alternative spaces have a high dependency
on Calgary’s Purpose Built venues:
•Dance (76%)
•Media (63%)
•Music (44%)
•Theatre (41%)
•Multidisciplinary (28%)
Proposed framework for action
Sources: Calgary Arts Development 2023 grantee database 114
FIGURE 121 Grantee Programming Intensity by Discipline and Type of Facility - % of Category
8%
63%
2%
76%
44%
41%
28%
82%
81%
27%
5%
5%
3%
8%
1%
7%
4%
88%
4%
8%
24%
35%
11%
5%
1%
1%
9%
11%
22%
4%
5%
5%
1%
10%
2%
15%
1%
11%
1%
4%
6%
18%
1%
1%
3%
3%
5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Arts Services (n=44)
Visual Arts (n=1,361)
Film/New Media (n=589)
Literary Arts (n=860)
Dance (n=2,518)
Music (n=4,025)
Theatre (n=4,792)
Multidisciplinary (n=1,394)
Purpose Built Space Repurposed Space Community Space Commercial Space Faith Based Education Outdoor Other Type
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
1.
Retain and strengthen
existing venues
§
Advocate to maintain the existing municipal property tax exemption policies for
facilities operated/owned by non-profit arts and cultural organizations l
§
City Administration Internal Process
§
Increase multi-year operating funding (adjusted to inflation) to venue-based
organizations that, in addition to delivering valuable public and/or artistic
programming, provide affordable and accessible space for the benefit of the
broader professional arts and cultural sector
l
§
Civic Partner (CADA)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Pilot a targeted facility operating grant that allocates funding to non-profit space
operators with the primary purpose of delivering subsidized, affordable access to
production space for multiple artists and cultural organizations – recommended
maximum funding of $40,000 annually
l
§
Civic Partner (CADA)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Clarify municipal sector development lead for the music industry and explore
opportunities to support recovery, stabilization and growth of small-scale live
music venues (e.g. property tax relief, streamlining of permits/licenses and
support for securing space ownership)
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
§
Civic Partner (CADA, CED)
§
Other (Alberta Gaming Liquor
Cannabis, West Anthem)
Proposed framework for action
115
Key Insights
Ilustrated in Figure 122 various cultural space projects have been proposed at different times
since 2008 – some have undertaken preliminary planning and/or feasibility work funded
through government contributions; others were identified solely as an unmet community need.
Despite Calgary Arts Development’s introduction of the Cultural Spaces Investment Process
(CSIP), a community project identification process coordinated over six years, many projects
were not advanced, either independently or through municipal funding pathways.
After the conclusion of the CSIP initiative in 2016, Calgary Arts Development undertook
interviews with major capital project proponents, some of whom had navigated the process
successfully. The group of community leaders highlighted the importance of internal
preparedness within organizations and the necessity for supportive external funding and
capacity-building measures, working in tandem, to advance arts and cultural facilities
successfully:
§Board capacity and governance - organizations must evaluate their board’s capacity to
undertake a project, including governance structure and roles; this may necessitate board
recruitment and ensuring alignment on project vision and roles
§Cultural change - the internal culture of the organization must be managed carefully,
especially during transitions to new spaces, as not all staff may adapt to the changes
§Decision making - clear and centralized decision-making is essential, with a designated
individual having final authority on project elements
Proposed framework for action
116
Strategic Priority 2: Build cross-sector capacity to advance projects
FIGURE 122 Unrealized Capital Projects 2008 - 2024
Project Title Description
ARCHETYPE 1 CULTURAL CLUSTER ANCHOR SPACES
NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY Proposal for The Bow second tower
ALBERTA COLLEGE OF ART AND DESIGN NEW CAMPUS
ARCHETYPE 2 CULTURAL CLUSTER INCUBATOR SPACES
CALGARY ARTS RESOURCES SOCIETY - PRODUCTION/STORAGE SPACE Feasibility study completed
CALGARY OPERA COMMUNITY ARTS CENTRE Feasibility and impact assessment completed
cSPACE ARTIST STUDIOS - ATTAINABLE HOMES SITE Interim use at Attainable Homes site
MAVA ARTIST RUN HUB Letter of Interest for 2 sites
cSPACE MARDA LOOP ARTIST LIVE-WORK HOUSING UNITS Conceptual design completed
PUMPHOUSE THEATRE EXPANSION Conceptual design completed
cSPACE CULTURAL HUB - REGIS HOTEL Feasibility study completed
ART GALLERY OF CALGARY STUDIOS
cSPACE ARTIST LANEWAY HOUSING UNITS - INGLEWOOD
PERFORMING ARTS LODGE RESIDENCE Feasibility study completed
ARTMOBILE EXPEDITION GALLERY AND STUDIO
CALGARY BLUES MUSIC ASSOCIATION - OFFICES
CALGARY COMMUNITY BAND FACILITY ASSOCIATION - REHEARSAL SPACE
FRIENDS OF GEORGINA THOMPSON ART CENTRE
GROUND ZERO THEATRE UPGRADES
LA CARAVAN DANCE THEATRE FACILITY
CASA MEXICO - MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY
ARCHETYPE 4 SMALL COMMUNITY ARTS CENTRE
INTERNATIONAL AVENUE ARTS AND CULTURE CENTRE Feasibility and site assessment completed
SOCIAL CHANGE ACCELERATOR AND PERFORMANCE SPACE Feasibility study completed
BRAZILIAN COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION - MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY
§Facility management - organizations must assess their ability to manage a facility post-
completion, including creating business plans that account for long-term operational costs
and revenue streams
§Needs assessment: early discussions should include a thorough needs assessment that
evaluates the necessity of the space and its potential impact on the community and city
§Utilizing community expertise - engaging in peer-to-peer mentorship and leveraging
existing community expertise can provide valuable guidance and reduce costs associated
with project planning and execution
§Seed funding and feasibility studies - providing early seed funding for needs assessments
and feasibility studies is crucial; this helps organizations mitigate risks and ensure project
viability before substantial resources are committed
§Funding throughout project lifecycle - committing to funding earlier in the project and
providing financial support throughout the construction process is essential
§Operating support - there is a need for stable operating funding systems to ensure that
cultural facilities do not become financial burdens (“white elephants”) post-construction
§Reduction of non-construction costs - municipalities can aid by reducing or waiving non-
construction costs and providing support for LEED certification
§Project expertise - providing access to a pool of professional experts early in the project
can help organizations navigate the complexities of construction and facility management;
this includes offering guidance on choosing consultants and project managers
§Depoliticizing funding - ensuring that funding mechanisms align with long-term arts and
culture infrastructure goals is crucial for project success
Proposed framework for action
Sources: 2008 Arts Space Investment Process Report, Calgary Arts Development; 2009 Regional Cultural Facilities Dialogue Report, Government of Alberta; 117
To b e g i n a d d r e s s i n g t h e l a c k o f c a p a c i t y e v i d e n t f o r a d v a n c i n g s m a l l t o m e d i u m -sized project
advocates in the cultural and creative sector, Calgary Arts Development has recently piloted a
number of initiatives to support space development including:
§Creative Spaces Mentorship Program delivered in partnership with Ontario ArtsBuild – in
the 2023 cohort, there were 19 mentee/mentor pairings of cultural leaders at various
stages of their careers and projects
§Community of Practice for owners and operators of creative space to exchange ideas and
explore opportunities for collaboration
§Creative Spaces Speaker Series, a platform for information sharing and networ king
opportunities
§Creative Spaces Toolkit, an online resource hosted by cSPACE Projects
An opportunity exists to build from these pilot projects to develop a purposeful and well-
resourced capacity-building program that moves beyond ad hoc initiatives to a more
concerted effort to advance the readiness of potentially impactful projects. With the lack of
effective developer incentives in Calgary, Calgary Arts Development’s capacity building efforts
could extend to fostering collaboration between the cultural and property sectors (e.g. mixed
use developers, affordable housing providers, Calgary Municipal Land Corporation). The
objective would be to foster understanding of each sector’s needs, drivers and operational
processes, enhancing their ability to work together effectively on creative space development.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
2.
Build cross-sector
capacity to advance
projects
§
Engage with ‘pipeline’ cultural project proponents to assess up-to-date
development status, fundraising objectives/performance and overall project
readiness to enable alignment with tri-level government coordination of capital
investment opportunities
l
§
Civic Partner (CADA)
§
Prepare a business case for multi-year program funding to support an expanded
capacity building program for planning and developing a broader spectrum of
social purpose real estate projects (e.g. United Way community hubs, non-profit
housing developers, cooperatives, etc.), including:
§
Network building opportunities among community-based real estate actors
for information sharing and collaborative opportunities
§
Training and peer learning (paid mentorship) that focuses on building
organizational readiness for social purpose real estate, including small sites
development, business model sustainability and innovative financing
§
One-on-one technical assistance/consulting that provides individualized
support from organizational strategy consultants (e.g Future Focus Program)
and real estate experts to navigate planning transactions and development
§
Service provider pool that assembles a list of resources including mission-
focused developers, legal support and project managers
l
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
Other (Ontario ArtsBuild, Alber ta
Real Estate Foundation, United Way
of Calgary, Trico Foundation, Rozsa
Foundation, Calgary Foundation)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Pilot a matching fundraising assistance program that supports new resources
required for the planning, organization and implementation of non-
profit cultural
space construction and renovation – recommended maximum funding of
$25,000 per study
l
§
Civic Partner (CADA)
§
Other (Rozsa Foundation, Calgary
Foundation)
Proposed framework for action
118
Key Insights
Based on AEA’s research and stakeholder engagement, a number of culture-related capital
projects are currently being advanced (partially or fully funded) or are proposed within the
next decade. Recognizing that facility projects can require 5-7 years (and often longer) to
advance from concept, financing, planning/design, opening, and stabilization, Figure 123
represents a significant portfolio of capital projects to steward and realize.
While there remains significant anchor capital projects in planning stages lead by Civic Partners
with substantial capacity for undertaking capital projects, many of the proposed projects are
City-led (e.g. new libraries and recreation centres), however remain unfunded in some cases.
Following the significant municipal department realignment in 2021/22, it is clear from
interviews with City staff that these types of social/cultural infrastructure projects require
substantial internal advocacy and stewardship to secure capital funding allocations from
Council and navigate through Infrastructure Services, let alone prioritizing potential footprints
for creative and cultural space.
Proposed framework for action
119
Identifying and advancing opportunities to integrate small and medium-sized cultural spaces
into the complex planning processes of new recreation centres, libraries and/or community
amenities in transit oriented development will require dedicated internal municipal resources
beyond the supportive, but unfocused and ad hoc, advocacy currently provided through
Recreation, Partnerships, Facilities and Real Estate and Development Services.
Resourcing a dedicated cultural planning unit at the City of Calgary focused on cultural
infrastructure would fill a significant gap and provides an opportunity to focus on stewarding
cultural space delivery, internal and external advocacy, and building capacity in the community
through technical support and funding pathways to advance priority projects.
Strategic Priority 3: Resource internal advocacy, stewardship and delivery
Proposed framework for action
Sources: AEA stakeholder interviews; public announcements; City of Calgary council reports 120
FIGURE 123 Pipeline Capital Projects
Project Title Description
Estimated
Sq.Ft.
ARCHETYPE 1 CULTURAL CLUSTER ANCHOR SPACES
WERKLUND CENTRE - PHASE 2
Comprehensive refurbishment of the existing Arts Commons facility 560,665
CONTEMPORARY CALGARY - PHASE 3
New entrance pavilion, new education/gallery wing, renovation of the existing building (energy upgrades, dome flat floor conversion and LED Art Dome, sculpture
park and garden)
29,438
HANGAR FLIGHT MUSEUM - NEW FACILITY
Capital campaign underway to replace existing fabric tent hanger with a new permanent building on the current site 60,000
INDIGENOUS GATHERING PLACE
Feasibility and design work underway for dedicated gathering place near the confluence of the Bow and Elbow Rivers 50,000
TELUS SPARK - MODERNIZATION
Comprehensive, multi-phase enhancements including Brainasium Outdoor Park; gallery transformations; new school entrance 130,000
THE CONFLUENCE - EXHIBITION UPGRADES
Three phases of upgrades to exhibition spaces 6,000
THE CONFLUENCE - SITE UPGRADES
Site concept plan underway
ARCHETYPE 2 CULTURAL CLUSTER INCUBATOR SPACES
ALBERTA BALLET SCHOOL - NEW CAMPUS
Feasibility study for integrated facility completed 70,000
CREATIVE ECONOMY INNOVATION HUB
Feasibility study underway 50,000
cSPACE NORTH WEST TRAVELLERS and HISTORIC FIRE HALL 1
Feasibility and concept design underway 44,913
NATIONAL ACCESSARTS CENTRE
Multidisciplinary Disability Community Arts Hub and the Fine Arts Building 27,000
ASIAN HERITAGE FOUNDATION ACCELERATOR HUB
Feasibility study completed for Asian Canadian intercultural space 8,000
CHINATOWN CULTURAL PLAN PROJECTS
Unfunded list of potential heritage building projects including National League Hall conversion to a museum; Canton / Ho Lem Blocks; Chinese Cultural Centre
BONNYBOOM BUILDING 2
Potential relocation of The Green Fools Theatre Society for a circus school space
SPRINGBOARD PERFORMANCE - CONTAINR
New location for outdoor art park and performance space; potential for expansion into permanent facility 7,840
ARCHETYPE 3 MAJOR COMMUNITY ARTS CENTRE
FOREST LAWN CIVIC CENTRE - PHASE 3
A new integrated recreation facility with library and 'arts and culture hub' 20,000
ARCHETYPE 4 SMALL COMMUNITY ARTS CENTRE
KIYOOKA OHE ARTS CENTRE AND SCULPTURE PARK
Feasibility study funded to explore a future community hub/pavilion 4,500
Total Estimated Sq.Ft. 1,068,356
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
3.
Resource internal
advocacy, stewardship
and delivery
§
Provide updated data trends analysis on cultural venues and community space
needs through citizen and arts professional surveys; CADA’s multi-year
operating grant data analysis; and annual reporting to council and the community l
§
Civic Partner (CADA)
§
Clarify outcomes, partnerships and roles in advocating, enabling and delivering
equitable access to a diversity of affordable cultural spaces across the city in the
revised Civic Arts Policy and Cultural Plan
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Partnerships)
§
Review and clarify the municipal roles and responsibilities to steward, partner
and/or operate City-
owned cultural facilities in the existing and future recreation
centre portfolio
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Recreation and Social Programs,
Partnerships)
§
Resource an expanded cultural planning unit within City Administration to
provide internal coordination and capacity support for the advancement and
stewardship of community-driven cultural space projects l
§
Change of Services by City
Administration
§
Council Budget Request
§
Prepare cultural space design guidelines as a supplement to the updated zoning
bylaw and Local Area Plans to support the property sector, cultural proponents
and City business units in stewarding appropriate and high quality cultural spaces l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Planning)
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Capture and communicate open data on municipal cultural infrastructure use
(e.g. cultural event usage of parks; community leases of City-
owned sites; cultural
pop-up and interim use relaxations tracking; triple bottom line Return on
Investment) through the preparation of a more transparent, accountable and
integrated public data framework across City business units
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Facilities, Real Estate Development
Services, Parks and Open Spaces)
§
Other (YMCA)
Proposed framework for action
121
Key Insights
Following nearly two decades of significant investment in cultural spaces by numerous
coalitions of non-profit, government, philanthropic, and corporate partners in Calgary, there is
now a number of challenges that are impacting the capital project funding/financing landscape:
§Canadian Heritage is planning for $64 million in savings by 2026-27 across its Grants and
Contributions programs
§Although the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund is in high demand, the limited funding it does have will
be reduced over the next few fiscal years
§The department is particularly focused on supporting enhancements to existing infrastructure and
expanding feasibility studies as opposed to new build projects
§They are reducing the department’s risk profile by requiring 80% of funds for capital project be
secured
§Despite an increase to $50 million annually in this budget, Provincial capital funding
through the Cultural Facilities Enhancement Program has not kept up with inflation and is
heavily oversubscribed – the program is heavily weighted to ‘shovel-ready’ projects
§No replacement at the municipal level for the Cultural MSI program
§Overall decline in individual philanthropy and a highly competitive corporate sponsorship
environment
§New tools such as community bonds are gaining momentum nationally but have limited
take-up in Calgary
Proposed framework for action
122
§Though the volume is quite low at 2-3 applications per quarter, 1/3 of Calgary Foundation
social impact investing clients are from the arts, typically playing a bridge role between
fundraising efforts
A strategic investment by the City of Calgary in a small facility capital grant program could
address the growing deferred maintenance challenges facing cultural spaces and, depending on
how it is structured, unlock the required partnerships with other government levels and
philanthropy to support a new generation of small to mid-sized facilities.
The scale and approach could be similar to the City of Calgary’s updated Capital Conservation
Grant (CCG) program. The funding was established to support the 120 community
associations and 60 social recreation organizations in addressing major lifecycle and capital
conservation projects in facilities they run on City-owned land. The program will be shifting to
a grant round structure in 2025.
The program was funded in the current budget cycle with $30.2 million allocated by Council
and eligible groups have access to funding for up to $300,000 annually. The CCG program has
three main programs and an advisory service that groups can apply to:
§Engineering Consulting Program (ECP)
§Lifecycle Capital Grant (LCG)
§Upgrade Projects
§Community Technical Advisory Support Services (CTASS)
Strategic Priority 4: Improve access to capital project funding and financing
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
4.
Improve access to
capital project funding
and affordable
financing
§
Prepare a renewed capital grant program framework for non-profit
organizations which outlines relevant policy, specific sources, adjudication
process and accountability requirements to support ongoing and emerging
capital project needs of the small to medium-sized cultural sector, including:
§
Design and resource a small capital grant program to support early-stage
planning, capacity building and research as well as limited building
improvements and accessibility upgrades to existing facilities and meanwhile
lease sites (secured for greater than 6 months) –
recommended maximum of
$25,000
§
Design and resource a matching capital grant program to support the
acquisition, renovation or expansion of non-profit cultural facilities –
recommended maximum funding up to $300,000 up to 50% of total project
costs
§
Fund a critical assistance capital grant to support urgent building life safety
upgrades – recommended maximum funding up to $25,000
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
§
Council Budget Request
§
Civic Partner (CADA)
§
Explore opportunities for a collective action fund among social finance
providers
(e.g. pooling program related investment) to support low-cost, flexible financing
to advance the purchase, preservation, renewal and development of cultural
space
l
§
Other (Calgary Foundation, Social
Enterprise Foundation, Trico
Foundation)
§
Advocate for an expanded Established Area Investment Fund program and
future redevelopment levies to support delivery of cultural space priorities
identified in Local Area Plans
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Planning)
§
Explore policy amendments and risk management approaches to leverage
underutilized municipal finance tools for supporting community-driven capital
projects, including access to municipal loan guarantees and reduction of
development permit fees
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Finance, Planning)
Proposed framework for action
123
Key Insights
The City of Calgary has drafted a new, long term Calgary Plan, an overarching framework for
how Calgary will grow and change over the next 30 years. Projected to reach 2 million people
by 2028, the Plan responds to unprecedented growth anticipated for the city and sets out
direction and policies that support decision-making about future land use, mobility networks,
servicing and investment. From an arts and cultural investment perspective, the plan re-iterates
many of Calgary Arts Development’s objectives identified at the beginning of the report,
including:
§All communities have affordable and equitable arts and culture amenities and services
year-round to enable arts, cultural expression and social connection
§Enabling economic opportunity, tourism potential and quality of life improvements through
Calgary’s arts and cultural sector
§Expand the health of the Greater Downtown, maintaining its importance as a business hub
while expanding its role as a centre of culture, arts, innovation and learning – key policies
focus on increasing the amount and quality public space and encouraging greater
activations through events and public art
§Prioritize accessible arts and cultural resources in underserved areas, specifically those with
equity-denied communities and Indigenous communities.
§Enable more arts and culture resources, gathering spaces and other daily amenities to be
located near housing and potentially co-located with other recreation or civic facilities
Proposed framework for action
124
As an extension of the Calgary Plan’s principles and objectives, an opportunity exists for local
area planning to play a more significant role in identifying and enabling a diverse array of
creative spaces by integrating them into the broader framework of urban development.
Through the next 10+ years, 42 multi-community, local area plans will be prepared – this
presents an immense opportunity for both engaging diverse communities in identifying priority
infrastructure as well as shaping potential investment pathways.
The City of Calgary is also currently undertaking a land use bylaw review with a focus on
reducing the number of defined land use districts to encourage greater flexibility and tolerance
of use. The new approach to land use has the potential to accommodate a higher level of
innovation within buildings, especially in the context of creative industries, arts production, and
small artisanal manufacturing. Flexible land use policies make it easier for small-scale producers
and artists to find affordable space within the city, particularly central industrial districts such as
Manchester, Alyth/Bonnybrook and Ramsay.
While the City’s Cultural Plan prioritized resourcing staff to embed cultural planning into the
new generation of local area planning processes, there remains limited capacity and clear
pathways in Arts and Culture to proactively engage in these processes effectively.
Strategic Priority 5: Shape cultural space provision through local area planning
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
5.
Shape cultural space
provision through local
area planning
§
Prepare a process map that identifies clear and consistent criteria, required
internal resources and engagement pathways for identifying and embedding
priorities for cultural space in Local Area Plans
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Community Planning, Partnerships)
§
Expand opportunities through the new City Plan and zoning bylaw process to
broaden development and operating partnerships with cultural organizations
permissible on community association sites l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Community Planning)
§
Civic Partner (Federation of Calgary
Communities)
§
Resource a dedicated cultural planning unit within Planning or Partnerships to
provide appropriate engagement, policy direction and project coordination to
support the proposed sequencing of Local Area Plans l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Community Planning, Partnerships)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Develop a pilot cultural district investment program to support implementation
of the Chinatown Cultural Plan and identify other potential district opportunities
in equity deserving communities l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Community Planning, Partnerships)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Monitor the impacts of the updated zoning bylaw (once approved) on creative
space typologies, including the interface with licensing and building code, to
ensure the objectives of flexibility and tolerance of use are achieved
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(City and Regional Planning)
Proposed framework for action
125
Key Insights
The City of Calgary prepared GamePLAN, a renewed vision for the publicly funded recreation
system across the city. As a major component of that initiative, staff are developing of an
associated Recreation Facilities Investment Plan to inform the anticipated eight additional
recreation centers projected to serve Calgary’s population growth. A series of ‘facility model
plans’ have been developed as high-level guides for future recreation facility planning, costing,
and development.
Two di f fe r ent ca te g or ie s have be e n de fi n ed t o s h ape th e s e f a c ili t ie s :
§Fundamental Facility - A core recreation facility with basic leisure and community amenities
§Enhanced Facility - A core recreation facility with expanded leisure, sport, and community
amenities that functions to support a broader range of experiences and activities
(including community gathering spaces and event hosting)
As a civic facility type with potential for embedding community-specific arts and culture spaces,
Integrated Facilities present a significant opportunity for partnership. These facilities are
intended to provide at least one core public recreation facility (e.g. arena, aquatic centre,
indoor field) plus gymnasia, fitness, meeting spaces, support services (e.g. daycare, food
services), arts programming spaces, or cultural and event spaces.
Proposed framework for action
126
City staff have drafted general direction for arts-related programming spaces, which could be
included in the development of integrated recreation facilities or as standalone facilities. These
include:
§Dance Studios - Spaces to accommodate group learning, group dance, rehearsal and / or
small-scale performances
§Wet/Dr y Ar t Studios - Spaces to accommodate creative activity such as drawing, painting,
crafting, quick draw stop motion animation, hand modeling clay / plasticine, knitting,
handheld looming, fusion glass w/ microwave, bookmaking, collage / mixed media, small
scale 3D printing
§Multipurpose Rooms - Space to accommodate creative activity such as theatre rehearsal,
dance rehearsal, cultural presentations, meetings, cultural events, art making activities,
fencing, and community organizations / clubs
To l e v e r a g e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t h a t i n v e s t m e n t i n n e w I n t e g r a t e d F a c i l i t i e s a n d o t h e r s o c i a l
infrastructure presents for supporting more distributed cultural spaces across Calgary (e.g.
libraries, community associations, public parks), early stewardship and advocacy in the
community engagement, master planning and budgeting processes is critical.
Strategic Priority 6: Integrate culture into new social infrastructure
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
6.
Integrate culture into
new social
infrastructure
§
Review the current operating models of cultural spaces in City-managed
recreation centres to identify internal/external operating partner model(s) for
potential cultural components within future integrated facilities
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Recreation and Social Programs,
Partnerships)
§
Advocate to City Council for capital funding allocations to deliver significant,
multi-functional cultural space through development of new and redeveloped
recreation centres (e.g. Forest Lawn Civic Centre) l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Recreation and Social Programs,
Partnerships)
§
Civic Partner (CADA)
§
Support the expansion of artist studio residency opportunities in City-owned
facilities and Civic Partner sites (e.g. libraries, community association facilities,
recreation centres)l
§
Civic Partner (Calgary Public Library,
Federation of Calgary Communities)
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Recreation and Social Programs)
§
Pilot a matching funds program available to community associations for
conversion and enhancement of spaces appropriate for live performing arts and
all-ages concerts (e.g. technology improvements, staging, acoustic treatments) l
§
Civic Partner (Federation of Calgary
Communities, CADA)
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Partnerships)
§
Maximize strategic opportunities with Calgary Public Library to invest in creative
media and production facilities (e.g. podcast rooms, music recording studios,
digital creation work stations) in new approved library projects l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Partnerships)
§
Civic Partner (Calgary Public Library)
§
Ensure opportunities for enhanced, event-ready infrastructure in park
development, redevelopment and management are prioritized in the Parks
Infrastructure Strategic Plan to support the requirements of major events and
live performance
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Parks and Open Spaces,
Partnerships)
Proposed framework for action
127
Key Insights
Calgary Arts Development has gathered multi-year, detailed data that is valuable for
connecting higher level analysis to the lived experiences of the city’s creative communities. The
surveys of Calgary-based arts professionals, deployed over three cycles since 2016, allows for
an important layer of trend investigation based on the individual experiences and shared
perspectives of artists, arts educators, administrators and other professionals. While the
question methodology has shifted somewhat over the various iterations of the surveys,
comparative data is illustrated to the degree possible. AEA has compiled the survey responses
relevant to this study from the 2017 (n=721), 2020 (n=828) and 2023 (n=880) cycles.
From the perspective of artists and arts professionals in Figure 124, the sentiment related to
Calgary as a city that supports them holistically in their practice and career development has
been strained. Survey data from 2023 indicates a rebound from pandemic lows, however
perceptions remain significantly less positive compared to 2017, the launch year of Building On
Our Momentum and the City of Calgary’s Cultural Plan.
Proposed framework for action
Sources: 2017 - 2023 Arts Professionals Surveys – Calgary Arts Development 128
Strategic Priority 7: Centre the needs of artist communities
Strongly Agree/Agree
2023
(n=880)
2020
(n=828)
2017
(n=721)
Calgary has a strong and vibrant arts scene 63% 49% 77%
Current arts and culture offerings are world class caliber 43% 37% 55%
Calgary is a good place to be an artist 45% 30% 58%
Calgarians are very supportive of my work in the arts 47% 31% 48%
FIGURE 124 Arts Professionals Survey 2017-2023
Proposed framework for action
Sources: 2017 - 2023 Arts Professionals Surveys – Calgary Arts Development 129
§Figure 125 reveals significant challenges faced by arts professionals in Calgary regarding
space availability and stability. In 2023, only 14% of respondents found it easy to secure
rehearsal or studio space, a decline from 23% in 2020, while just 12% found it easy to
access presenting or performance spaces. These figures highlight a growing scarcity of
suitable spaces for artistic practice. Additionally, more than half of respondents (57%)
reported difficulty finding long-term spaces, reflecting persistent instability in the availability
of affordable and secure venues.
§There is an increasing demand for predictable access to spaces, with 44% of respondents
in 2023 indicating that such access would benefit their practice. Meanwhile, dissatisfaction
with current options remains high, as 40% of respondents expressed a desire to relocate
to different spaces, and 32% are actively seeking more suitable venues. These findings
underscore the mismatch between the needs of arts professionals and the spaces
currently available.
§Figure 126 highlights the precarious nature of space usage for many artists - a significant
portion rents or leases space on short-term agreements, with only 12% securing annual
leases and just 24% owning their primary space outside their homes. Furthermore, only
48% feel confident that their access to space is secure for the next three years, while 22%
fear losing access at short notice.
FIGURE 126 Arts Professional Surveys – Tenure and Stability 2017 - 2023
FIGURE 125 Arts Professional Surveys – Space Availability 2017 - 2023
Strongly Agree/Agree 2023 2020 2017
It was easy to find rehearsal/studio space 14% 23% -
It was easy to find presenting/performance space 12% - -
More predictable access to space would benefit my practice 44% 40% -
It is difficult to find suitable long-term space 57% 54% 51%
I am currently seeking more suitable space 32% 29% -
I would prefer a different location for my space 40% 40% -
I need more space for my artistic practice than I currently have 56% 54% 53%
I need space but do not currently have space for my artistic practice 30% 23% 17%
Strongly Agree/Agree 2023 2020 2017
I have space within my home that I use for my artistic practice 18% 16% 17%
I rent, lease, or sublease the primary space I use for my artistic practice
either month to month or on terms shorter than a year
10% 10% 30%
I rent, lease, or sublease the primary space I use for my artistic practice
annually
12% 11% 13%
I own the primary space I use for my artistic practice outside my home 24% 28% 30%
My studio or production space is provided free of charge (e.g., member
of dance troupe, university student)
37% 34% 35%
I currently share my space with other artists 30% 23% 17%
I feel that my use of my access to space is secure for the next 3 years 48% 50% 50%
I feel that I may lose use access to my space at short notice 22% 18% 19%
Recent surveys from Calgary Arts Development (Figure 127) and cSPACE Projects (Figure
128) of the space needs and preferences of artists and arts organizations throughout Calgary
indicate a significant and growing need for affordable studios, rehearsal space, multi-purpose
space and small performance venues.
Proposed framework for action
Sources: 2017 - 2023 Arts Professionals Survey, Calgary Arts Development; 2022/23 Space Needs Survey, cSPACE Projects 130
FIGURE 128 Production/Studio Spaces in Demand: cSPACE Space Needs Survey– 2023
(n=131)
Non-profit Organizations Number %
< 500 sq.ft. 8 20%
500 - 1,000 sq.ft. 4 10%
1,000 - 2,000 sq.ft. 16 40%
2,000 - 3,000 sq.ft. 4 10%
3,000 - 5,000 sq.ft. 1 3%
> 5,000 sq.ft. 4 10%
Total 40
Individual Artists Number %
Emerging 39 43%
< 500 sq.ft. 18 20%
500 - 1,000 sq.ft. 15 16%
1,000 - 2,000 sq.ft. 3 3%
2,000 - 3,000 sq.ft. 3 3%
Mid career 34 37%
< 500 sq.ft. 19 21%
500 - 1,000 sq.ft. 7 8%
1,000 - 2,000 sq.ft. 5 5%
2,000 - 3,000 sq.ft. 2 2%
3,000 - 5,000 sq.ft. 1 1%
Established 18 20%
< 500 sq.ft. 3 3%
500 - 1,000 sq.ft. 8 9%
1,000 - 2,000 sq.ft. 4 4%
2,000 - 3,000 sq.ft. 2 2%
3,000 - 5,000 sq.ft. 1 1%
Total 91 100%
Artist Studio
49.1%
Rehearsal Space
21.3%
Digital Media Space
6.6%
Multipurpose
Space
5.6%
Performance
4.2%
Workshop
2.8%
Presentation
2.8%
Storage
3.5%
Other
4.2%
FIGURE 127 Creative Spaces in Demand from Arts Professionals Survey – 2023
(n=271)
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
7.
Centre the needs of
artist communities
§
Audit online cultural space mapping and brokering platforms and improve their
functionality to more effectively connect space supply and demand l
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
Consider amending policies related to community use of city-owned properties
to prioritize ‘nominal’ rents (ie operating costs only, versus the current policy of
“up to” 50% of market rates currently stipulated) for interim use and short-
term
leases and licenses to nonprofit organizations
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Facilities, Real Estate Development
Services)
§
Resource consistent and robust cultural space research, engagement and
advocacy through existing bi-annual artist survey methodology and annual grant
reporting data tracking and analysis
l
§
Civic Parter (CADA)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Prepare an audit of existing underutilized, pre-development and surplus City-
owned sites that illustrate potential for interim cultural and community use and
provide public access to site information on the current and in-development
opportunities
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Facilities, Real Estate Development
Services)
§
Research the current market demand for artists’ live-work space and undertake
a preliminary feasibility assessment for advancing potential models of
development (e.g. cooperatives, shared equity)
l
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
Explore opportunities for partnership with affordable housing development
entities (e.g. brokering, co-development, master leasing) to facilitate the delivery
of affordable live-work artist housing projects
l
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
Prioritize and support the delivery of at least100,000 sq.ft. of affordable
production and rehearsal space through new, repurposed or expanded City,
nonprofit and private space over the next ten years l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Facilities, Real Estate Development
Services)
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
Council Budget Request
Proposed framework for action
131
Key Insights
Calgary’s cSPACE Projects was established in 2011 as a SPRE entity to “promote, coordinate
and facilitate real estate projects that establish affordable facilities, accommodations and
education opportunities for artists and registered non-profit organizations operating in the
arts or community sector.” To that end, cSPACE was set up to procure, own, lease, manage,
construct, renovate or otherwise develop and operate:
§ “any facility that supports artistic and cultural activity that benefits the public, including
studio, office, exhibition, production, rehearsal and performance space”
§“below-market residential accommodation thereto exclusively to relieve poverty of artists
and their families, elderly artists and disabled artists primarily of low or modest income”
Created as a subsidiary of Calgary Arts Development in partnership with the Calgary
Foundation, cSPACE was established to address a critical demand for creation, production,
presentation and rehearsal spaces that are affordable, sustainable and collaborative. While not
formally identified and funded as a Civic Partner, it is a ‘controlled’ entity of the City of Calgary,
supported in part annually by Calgary Arts Development and governed by a volunteer board
of directors (including shareholder representation), reporting financially to the City of Calgary
on an annual basis. There is also a property ‘waterfall’ relationship with the municipality if the
organization ever had to wind down - the Memorandum of Association requires properties to
be transferred to Calgary Arts Development, the City of Calgary or another ‘qualified donee’
(designed to provide cSPACE’s other shareholder, the Calgary Foundation, an opportunity to
be actively involved in maintaining properties in perpetuity as a community asset).
Proposed framework for action
132
In 2017/18, cSPACE completed the acquisition, master planning and development of a 3 acre
site and 48,000 sq. ft. creative hub in South Calgary, partnering with two private sector
residential developers to execute the vision of a mixed use, culture-led project. cSPACE has
also collaborated with the City of Calgary, Calgary Arts Development and Alberta Real Estate
Foundation to deliver a portfolio of interim use spaces in partnership with the private sector
to the cultural sector and has been identified through an open Request for Proposals process
by the City of Calgary as the preferred entity to redevelop and activate the Downtown No. 1
Fire Hall and NorthWest Tr ave ll er s building.
As a non-profit developer, cSPACE was conceived to build and manage a sustainable portfolio
of hub spaces across Calgary – to this purpose, the organization can be a vital component of
delivering new cultural infrastructure for Calgary over the next 10 years. However access to
affordable capital and sites, as well as the debt financing load retained from its initial project,
has limited its ability to advance further projects through the Creative Space Development
Cycle at scale (shown on following page).
Building from its track record since its inception in 2011, the potential of cSPACE as an
intermediary for culture-focused real estate can be advanced significantly through a renewed
partnership with the City of Calgary and its shareholders as well as new types of
collaborations with non-profit housing developers, the culture sector and the property sector.
Strategic Priority 8: Scale and amplify social purpose real estate models
Proposed framework for action
133
Engaging the independent studio sector
Over the last decade, a stable and vital independent studio sector has come into its own in
Calgary, providing a growing portfolio of workspaces managed by entrepreneurial artist
collectives and entrepreneurs focused on the provision of affordable creative studios, rehearsal
spaces, workshops, exhibition and programming spaces.
Operating with various business models, quality levels, and price points, the space providers
represent a significant capacity for operating and activating collaborative spaces that could be
leveraged to deliver greater stability and community vitality throughout Calgary. While not an
exhaustive list, they include:
§Burns Visual Arts (15 studios)
§The BOWS (23 studios)
§nvrlnd. arts foundation (26 studios)
§Workshop Studios (40 open concept studios)
§500 Collective (20 studios)
§CommunityWise (50 offices/workspaces)
§Blank Page Studio (8 workspaces)
§The New Blank
These enterprises present a significant opportunity to engage in the co-development and/or
operations of new cultural infrastructure across the city.
Meanwhile use of private and public assets
Success in social purpose real estate often involves starting with more accessible models while
building toward more permanent solutions that can create lasting community assets and build
collective wealth. Temporary occupation and utilization of underused or vacant commercial or
city-owned properties by artists, arts organizations, or other cultural entities has been an
informal strategy in Calgary for many years. Calgary Arts Development was involved in 2011
with the Seafood Market Studios in partnership with Calgary Municipal Land Corporation,
delivering 14 affordable artist studios and a rehearsal space in East Village in a surplus property
due for redevelopment.
These arrangements, often facilitated through short-term leases or licenses, provide a win-win
situation for municipalities, property owners, and the creative community by activating vacant
buildings, delivering affordable space to community organizations, and reducing carrying costs
for property owners.
Over the last two years, cSPACE Projects was funded by Calgary Arts Development and
Alberta Real Estate Foundation to develop and execute a pilot ‘meanwhile’ space program.
Approximately 69,156 sq. ft. have been secured for 30 short term leases with 12 separate
land/property owners. The pilot initiative has supported a broad range of space for
organizations with affordable short-term leases such as Sled Island, Stride Gallery and Alcove
Centre for the Arts.
There is an opportunity to work more strategically with surplus public properties as well.
Maximizing the opportunities to collaborate with REDS/Facilities may require a more
transparent exchange of information (e.g. an online database), a role in REOI/RFP processes
and greater levels of coordination around preliminary building assessments of the portfolio.
Proposed framework for action
Source: Adapted from 2024 Making Space for Culture Incubation Program – Program Reports Volumes 1 - 3, Left Bank Co. 134
FIGURE 129 Creative Space Development Cycle
Where are we now?
Significant data on cultural facility operations,
patterns of consumption, real estate trends and
issues destabilizing creative production are siloed,
under-resourced and lack cohesion as a platform
for effective strategy, policy and advocacy work.
Where do we want to be?
A strong and coherent rationale for why key
stakeholders should play a role in making space
for culture, relying on evidence-based research,
engagement and advocacy with different
stakeholder groups and policy development to
build awareness and enable solutions.
Where are we now?
A significant gap exists in connecting the supply of available and affordable property with
the demand from the cultural sector. Market place efforts delivered through various listings
platforms (e.g. Spacefinder) have not been effective and lack consistent resourcing. The
capacity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) to advance and steward space
projects is limited, cSPACE’s SPACEPILOT program has provided new capacity for
brokering short-term interim use as a development tool but does not address long-term
instability. Traditional leasing agents are generally disincentivized from working with the
below-market rents required. There may be a lack of awareness within the property sector
(public and private) of what creative spaces are needed.
Where do we want to be?
Identifying and stewarding a pipeline of cultural space opportunities through more effective
capacity building, a brokered marketplace to match available and future spaces with needs,
and early-stage funding to support project exploration - all with the goal of building more
successful cross-sectoral partnerships and aligning agendas towards shared community
outcomes.
Where are we now?
Securing affordable, appropriate and stable space for
the small and mid-sized cultural sector is challenging in
Calgary’s cyclical economy. However, a lack of
accessible and flexible capital funding and financing –
as well as access to project development expertise –
means significant opportunities for sector-led projects
have remained unrealized.
Where do we want to be?
Collaborative partnerships between entrepreneurial
space intermediaries, City business units, funders and
a knowledgeable property sector that is based on an
alignment of value propositions, clear expectations of
outcomes and de-risking of innovative financial and
development models leads to space provision at scale.
Where are we now?
SME spaces are grappling with a
complex and interconnected set of
issues that threaten their financial
stability and long-term viability.
New business models are required
but challenges in the funding
environment are a constraint to
the risk-taking required to innovate.
Where do we want to be?
A ‘scaffolding’ of financial supports
and civic/cultural anchor
partnerships that better enable
equity, stability and vitality of SME
cultural production and
consumption spaces that generate
value for the diversity of Calgary’s
communities.
Where are we now?
There has been limited evaluation
of the economic, social, and
environmental impacts of the
cultural capital projects on Calgary’s
quality of life. This is key for
supporting and scaling future
opportunities and proving the value
proposition to stakeholders.
Where do we want to be?
Capture and communicate data
across the ecosystem, employing an
impact framework that uses
consistent definitions. metrics and
methodologies to demonstrate the
collective value of cultural space
outcomes.
Impact
Assessment
AdvocacyPolicyResearch Market
place
Feasibility
study
Capacity
building
Property
audit
Brokering
Acquisition
(buy or
rent)
Development
management
(base build)
Fit out Operations Curation &
Programming
PHASE
1:
Advocacy
2:
Pipeline
3:
Acquisition/Development
4:
Operations
5:
Evaluation
FUNCTION
CULTURAL SMEs
PROPERTY SECTOR | CITY OF CALGARY
CALGARY ARTS DEVELOPMENT | CITY OF CALGARY
cSPACE PROJECTS CIVIC & CULTURAL ANCHORS
Proposed framework for action
Source: Adapted from ‘Case for Support: Regenerative Investment in Culture’, Brian McBay, 221A
MORE
ACCESSIBLE
MORE EQUITY
BUILDING
NPO
Artist
SPRE
NPO
Artist
SPRE
NPO
NPO
Artist
Land/Building Owned
§SPRE entity may develop the asset
and/or control the land/building
§NPOs and Artists are tenants in
various lease terms and space sizes
§e.g. cSPACE, CommunityWise,
Kahanoff Centre
Ground Lease
§SPRE entity owns the land and may
develop the asset
§Decouples land and building
§NPO leases the building long term
§e.g. Some public sector-to-SPRE
entities
NPO
SPRE
Shared Equity
§SPRE entity contributes equity and
helps NPOs and Artists secure
financing
§SPRE entity may develop the asset
§NPOs and Artists have
shared/fractionalized ownership
§Restrictions on resale to maintain
asset as cultural space
§e.g. limited equity cooperatives
Asset Transfer
§SPRE entity develops the asset and
owns land/building for a period of time
§NPO leases for a predetermined time,
progressing to an option to purchase
at the end of the lease
§Asset value locked in at purchase price
§Restrictions on resale to maintain asset
as cultural space
§e.g. lease to own models
NPO
NPO
Interim Activation
§SPRE entity acts as intermediary
to support ‘meanwhile’ use in
vacant or underutilized assets
before redevelopment
§NPOs and Artists are short-
term tenants/programmers in
various lease/license terms
§e.g. nvrlnd foundation,
Springboard Performance,
SPACEPILOT
Artist
135
FIGURE 130 Social Purpose Real Estate Strategies for Cultural Space Development
STRATEGIC PRIORITY
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
URGENT
(1 – 2 Yrs)
STRATEGIC
(1 – 5 Yrs)
SYSTEMIC
(1 – 10 Yrs)
IMPLEMENTATION
8.
Scale and amplify
social purpose real
estate models
§
Resource the programmatic and geographic expansion of the meanwhile space
program currently operated by cSPACE in the Greater Downtown l
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
Council Budget Request
§
Expand the typology of cultural consumption and production uses eligible to
participate in the Downtown Calgary Development Incentive Program (beyond
‘Performing Arts Centre’) to support adaptive reuse of underutilized
commercial assets
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Planning)
§
Clarify roles, responsibilities and processes for identifying, specifying and securing
cultural amenity space delivered through density bonus agreements with the
property sector
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Downtown Strategy)
§
Prepare an audit of private and City-owned heritage properties within the
Greater Downtown Area (bonusable districts with sufficient development
pressure) that are underutilized; illustrate potential for adaptive reuse as cultural
facilities; and/or have transferable density rights
l
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Downtown Strategy, Facilities)
§
Civic Partner (Heritage Calgary)
§
Explore policy amendments for directing City-owned surplus land disposition to
cSPACE and other non-profit entities that advance the development or
preservation of long-term affordable cultural space l
§
Civic Partner (CADA/cSPACE)
§
City Administration Internal Process
(Downtown Strategy, Facilities,
Partnerships)
Proposed framework for action
136
Appendices
Appendix 1 - Stakeholder Interviews
§City/Development
§
Arts and Culture
§
Calgary Arts Development
§
Heritage Calgary
§
Calgary Public Library
§
Trico Communities
§
MATCO Development Corp
§
City Planning, Downtown Strategy
§
City and Community Planning
§
Civic Partnerships
§
Recreation
§
Real Estate and Development Services
§
Land and Asset Management
§
Ward 9 office
§
Ward 5 office
§Creative Sector
§
cSPACE Projects/Meanwhile Pilot
§
nvrlnd foundation
§
Christine Klassen Gallery + 500 Collective
§
The Bows
§
BonnyBoom
§
Shedpoint
§
The Grand
§
BUMP Festival/McHugh House
§
Contemporary Calgary
§
Fort Calgary
§
Alberta Ballet School
§
Calgary Stampede Youth Campus
§
YMCA Arts
§
West Anthem/Bird Creative
§
Yo ut h S i n g e r s
§
Springboard Performance
§Community/Funders
§
Asian Heritage Foundation
§
Action Dignity
§
Calgary Foundation
§
Alberta Foundation for the Arts
§
Canada Council for the Arts
§
Province of Alberta, Community Grants
§
Federation of Calgary Communities
Stakeholder Engagement – Participant List
AEA conducted individual and group interviews with arts and cultural community members as
well as a broad range of stakeholders that shape the enabling environment for cultural spaces,
including:
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
139
* Broad venue categories were used in survey analysis due to the low survey participation level – the four typologies aggregate the more detailed typologies used for mapping purposes in Section 3 to allow for cross-tabulation.
Venue Major Types
# of Venues
% of Total
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29%
Presentation Spaces 6 10%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35%
Total 62 100%
Venue by Major Type and
Primary Discipline
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Multidisciplinary 6 10% 38%
Culture/Heritage 3 5% 19%
Music 3 5% 19%
Other 2 3% 13%
Arts Services 1 2% 6%
Community Arts/Social Practice 1 2% 6%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Theatre 8 13% 44%
Multidisciplinary 6 10% 33%
Music 3 5% 17%
Dance 1 2% 6%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
Visual Arts 3 5% 50%
Culture/Heritage 1 2% 17%
Film/Television/New Media 1 2% 17%
Music 1 2% 17%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Multidisciplinary 9 15% 41%
Dance 4 6% 18%
Theatre 4 6% 18%
Visual Arts 3 5% 14%
Film/Television/New Media 1 2% 5%
Other 1 2% 5%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
Arts Spaces Infrastructure Report – Strategic Update
140
* Broad budget groups were used in survey analysis due to the low survey participation level – the four budget groups aggregate the more granular budget categories captured in the survey to allow for cross-tabulation.
Venue Operating Budget by
Category
# of Venues
% of Total
A (Up to $50,000) 4 6%
B ($50,001 - $100,000) 3 5%
C ($100,001 - $200,000) 15 24%
D ($200,001 - $500,000) 13 21%
E ($500,001 - $1,000,000) 9 15%
F (1,000,001 - $3,000,000) 9 15%
G ($3,000,001 and over) 9 15%
Total 62 100%
Venue Operating Budget Group
# of Venues
% of Total
A-B 7 11%
C-D 28 45%
E-F 18 29%
G 9 15%
Total 62 100%
Venue Operating Budget Group
by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
A-B 1 2% 6%
C-D 10 16% 63%
E-F 3 5% 19%
G 2 3% 13%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
A-B 2 3% 11%
C-D 4 6% 22%
E-F 8 13% 44%
G 4 6% 22%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
A-B
C-D 2 3% 33%
E-F 1 2% 17%
G 3 5% 50%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
A-B 4 6% 18%
C-D 12 19% 55%
E-F 6 10% 27%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
141
Venue Size
# of Venues
% of Total
Less than 2,500 sq. ft. 14 23%
2,501-5,000 sq. ft. 14 23%
5,001-10,000 sq. ft. 13 21%
10,001-50,000 sq. ft. 12 19%
Over 50,000 sq. ft. 9 15%
Total 62 100%
Venue Size by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Less than 2,500 sq. ft. 3 5% 19%
2,501-5,000 sq. ft. 4 6% 25%
5,001-10,000 sq. ft. 2 3% 13%
10,001-50,000 sq. ft. 5 8% 31%
Over 50,000 sq. ft. 2 3% 13%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Less than 2,500 sq. ft. 5 8% 28%
2,501-5,000 sq. ft. 3 5% 17%
5,001-10,000 sq. ft. 4 6% 22%
10,001-50,000 sq. ft. 3 5% 17%
Over 50,000 sq. ft. 3 5% 17%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
Less than 2,500 sq. ft. 1 2% 17%
2,501-5,000 sq. ft. 1 2% 17%
5,001-10,000 sq. ft. 1 2% 17%
10,001-50,000 sq. ft.
Over 50,000 sq. ft. 3 5% 50%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Less than 2,500 sq. ft. 5 8% 23%
2,501-5,000 sq. ft. 6 10% 27%
5,001-10,000 sq. ft. 6 10% 27%
10,001-50,000 sq. ft. 4 6% 18%
Over 50,000 sq. ft. 1 2% 5%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
142
Years Operating as Arts/Culture
Venue
# of Venues
% of Total
1-5 yrs 16 26%
6-10 yrs 16 26%
Over 10 Yrs 30 48%
Total 62 100%
Years Operating as Arts/Culture
Venue by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
1-5 yrs 3 5% 19%
6-10 yrs 1 2% 6%
Over 10 Yrs 12 19% 75%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
1-5 yrs 3 5% 17%
6-10 yrs 4 6% 22%
Over 10 Yrs 11 18% 61%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
1-5 yrs 3 5% 50%
6-10 yrs 2 3% 33%
Over 10 Yrs 1 2% 17%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
1-5 yrs 7 11% 32%
6-10 yrs 9 15% 41%
Over 10 Yrs 6 10% 27%
Total 62 100%
Age of Building Construction
# of Venues
% of Total
Over 100 years 10 16%
40-100 years 16 26%
20-39 years 7 11%
Less than 20 years 21 34%
Unkown 8 13%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
143
Venue Organizational Structure
by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
Not-for-profit society 27 44%
Charitable organization 22 35%
Incorporated business 5 8%
Part 9 Not-for-profit corporation 5 8%
Other 3 5%
Total 62 100%
Venue Organizational Structure
by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Not-for-profit society 10 16% 63%
Charitable organization 5 8% 31%
Part 9 Not-for-profit corporation 1 2% 6%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Not-for-profit society 9 15% 50%
Charitable organization 7 11% 39%
Part 9 Not-for-profit corporation 1 2% 6%
Other 1 2% 6%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
Charitable organization 3 5% 50%
Not-for-profit society 2 3% 33%
Other 1 2% 17%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Charitable organization 7 11% 32%
Not-for-profit society 6 10% 27%
Incorporated business 5 8% 23%
Part 9 Not-for-profit corporation 3 5% 14%
Other 1 2% 5%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
144
Venue Development Typologies
Adapted: The facility has been repurposed or adapted from its original use for cultural
activities, with modifications to accommodate cultural functions.
Purpose-built: The facility was specifically designed and constructed for cultural activities,
with dedicated spaces and infrastructure.
Combination: The facility includes both purpose-built areas and adapted spaces for
cultural activities.
Nature of Venue Development -
% of Total
# of Venues
% of Total
Adapted 24 39%
Combination 20 32%
Purpose-built 14 23%
Not sure / other 4 6%
Total 62 100%
Nature of Venue Development
by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Adapted 3 5% 19%
Combination 8 13% 50%
Purpose-built 5 8% 31%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Adapted 8 13% 44%
Combination 6 10% 33%
Purpose-built 4 6% 22%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
Adapted 4 6% 67%
Combination 1 2% 17%
Purpose-built 1 2% 17%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Adapted 9 15% 41%
Combination 5 8% 23%
Purpose-built 4 6% 18%
Not sure / other 4 6% 18%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
145
Venue Primary Geographic
Market
# of Venues
% of Total
Neighbourhood Based 1 2%
City Centre 8 13%
North East 1 2%
North West 3 5%
South 1 2%
South East 3 5%
Greater Calgary Region 35 56%
Province of Alberta 10 16%
Total 62 100%
Venue Primary Geographic
Market by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Neighbourhood Based 1 2% 6%
City Centre 2 3% 13%
Greater Calgary Region 7 11% 44%
North East 1 2% 6%
North West 2 3% 13%
Province of Alberta 2 3% 13%
South East 1 2% 6%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
City Centre 3 5% 17%
North West 1 2% 6%
South East 2 3% 11%
Greater Calgary Region 10 16% 56%
Province of Alberta 2 3% 11%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
City Centre 1 2% 17%
Greater Calgary Region 1 2% 17%
Province of Alberta 4 6% 67%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
City Centre 2 3% 9%
South 1 2% 5%
Greater Calgary Region 17 27% 77%
Province of Alberta 2 3% 9%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Base Information
146
Venue Location (FSA)
# of Venues
% of Total
T2G 19 31%
T2E 7 11%
T2T 6 10%
T3C 5 8%
T2P 4 6%
T2R 4 6%
T3E 3 5%
T2M 2 3%
T2A 1 2%
T2B 1 2%
T2C 1 2%
T2H 1 2%
T2N 1 2%
T2S 1 2%
T2X 1 2%
T3A 1 2%
T3B 1 2%
T3G 1 2%
T3J 1 2%
T3K 1 2%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
147
% of Operating Expenses Related
to Facility
# of Venues
% of Total
Up to 10% 7 11%
11% to 20% 10 16%
21% - 30% 9 15%
31% - 40% 5 8%
41% - 50% 6 10%
Over 50% 25 40%
Total 62 100%
% of Operating Expenses Related
to Facility by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Up to 10% 1 2% 6%
11% to 20% 2 3% 13%
21% - 30% 1 2% 6%
31% - 40% 2 3% 13%
41% - 50% 3 5% 19%
Over 50% 7 11% 44%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Up to 10% 3 5% 17%
11% to 20% 5 8% 28%
21% - 30% 3 5% 17%
31% - 40% 1 2% 6%
41% - 50% 0% 0%
Over 50% 6 10% 33%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
Up to 10% 0% 0%
11% to 20% 1 2% 17%
21% - 30% 3 5% 50%
31% - 40% 0% 0%
41% - 50% 0% 0%
Over 50% 2 3% 33%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Up to 10% 3 5% 14%
11% to 20% 2 3% 9%
21% - 30% 2 3% 9%
31% - 40% 2 3% 9%
41% - 50% 3 5% 14%
Over 50% 10 16% 45%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
148
% of Operating Expenses Related
to Facility by Budget Group
# of
Venues
% of
Total
% of
Category
A-B 7 11% 100%
Up to 10% 2 3% 29%
11% to 20% 0% 0%
21% - 30% 0% 0%
31% - 40% 3 5% 43%
41% - 50% 1 2% 14%
Over 50% 1 2% 14%
C-D 28 45% 100%
Up to 10% 1 2% 4%
11% to 20% 5 8% 18%
21% - 30% 2 3% 7%
31% - 40% 0% 0%
41% - 50% 3 5% 11%
Over 50% 17 27% 61%
E-F 18 29% 100%
Up to 10% 4 6% 22%
11% to 20% 2 3% 11%
21% - 30% 5 8% 28%
31% - 40% 1 2% 6%
41% - 50% 2 3% 11%
Over 50% 4 6% 22%
G 9 15% 100%
Up to 10% 0% 0%
11% to 20% 3 5% 33%
21% - 30% 2 3% 22%
31% - 40% 1 2% 11%
41% - 50% 0% 0%
Over 50% 3 5% 33%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Revenue
149
Current Ratio of Venue Revenue
# of Venues
% of Total
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue 18 29%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue 10 16%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 4 6%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue 9 15%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue 15 24%
Not sure / Other 6 10%
Total 62 100%
Current Ratio of Venue Revenue by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
3 5% 19%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
3 5% 19%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 0% 0%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
1 2% 6%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
5 8% 31%
Not sure / Other 4 6% 25%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
7 11% 39%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
5 8% 28%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 0% 0%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
3 5% 17%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
2 3% 11%
Not sure / Other 1 2% 6%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
0% 0%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
0% 0%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 0% 0%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
2 3% 33%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
4 6% 67%
Not sure / Other 0% 0%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
8 13% 36%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
2 3% 9%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 4 6% 18%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
3 5% 14%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
4 6% 18%
Not sure / Other 1 2% 5%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Revenue
150
Current Ratio of Revenue by Operating Budget
Size
# of
Venues
% of
Total
% of
Category
A-B 7 11% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
2 3% 29%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
1 2% 14%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 1 2% 14%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
1 2% 14%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
2 3% 29%
Not sure / Other 0% 0%
C-D 28 45% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
9 15% 32%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
4 6% 14%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 2 3% 7%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
3 5% 11%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
6 10% 21%
Not sure / Other 4 6% 14%
E-F 18 29% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
5 8% 28%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
3 5% 17%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 1 2% 6%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
3 5% 17%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
5 8% 28%
Not sure / Other 1 2% 6%
G 9 15% 100%
Earned revenue significantly outweighs contributed revenue
2 3% 22%
Earned revenue moderately outweighs contributed revenue
2 3% 22%
Earned and contributed revenue are roughly equal 0% 0%
Contributed revenue moderately outweighs earned revenue
2 3% 22%
Contributed revenue significantly outweighs earned revenue
2 3% 22%
Not sure / Other 1 2% 11%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Revenue
151
Primary Funding Source for
Venue Operating Expenses
# of Venues
% of Total
Earned revenue 24 39%
City / municipal grants and funding 7 11%
Individual donations and philanthropy 6 10%
Provincial grants and funding 5 8%
Federal grants and funding 4 6%
Foundations 2 3%
Other 14 23%
Total 62 100%
Primary Funding Source for
Venue Operating Expenses by
Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Earned revenue 4 6% 25%
Individual donations and philanthropy 4 6% 25%
City / municipal grants and funding 3 5% 19%
Provincial grants and funding 1 2% 6%
Other 4 6% 25%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Earned revenue 10 16% 56%
Federal grants and funding 2 3% 11%
City / municipal grants and funding 1 2% 6%
Individual donations and philanthropy 1 2% 6%
Provincial grants and funding 1 2% 6%
Other 3 5% 17%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
City / municipal grants and funding 3 5% 50%
Foundations 1 2% 17%
Provincial grants and funding 1 2% 17%
Other 1 2% 17%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Earned revenue 10 16% 45%
Federal grants and funding 2 3% 9%
Provincial grants and funding 2 3% 9%
Foundations 1 2% 5%
Individual donations and philanthropy 1 2% 5%
Other 6 10% 27%
Total 62
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Revenue
152
Primary Funding Source for
Venue Operating Expenses by
Budget Group
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
A-B 7 11% 100%
Earned revenue 4 6% 57%
City / municipal grants and funding 1 2% 14%
Individual donations and philanthropy 1 2% 14%
Provincial grants and funding 1 2% 14%
C-D 28 45% 100%
Earned revenue 14 23% 50%
Provincial grants and funding 7 11% 25%
Individual donations and philanthropy 2 3% 7%
Other 2 3% 7%
City / municipal grants and funding 1 2% 4%
Federal grants and funding 1 2% 4%
Foundations 1 2% 4%
E-F 18 29% 100%
Earned revenue 9 15% 50%
Federal grants and funding 3 5% 17%
Individual donations and philanthropy 3 5% 17%
Other 2 3% 11%
City / municipal grants and funding 1 2% 6%
G 9 15% 100%
City / municipal grants and funding 4 6% 44%
Earned revenue 2 3% 22%
Foundations 1 2% 11%
Provincial grants and funding 1 2% 11%
Other 1 2% 11%
Grand Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
153
Degree of Change in Venue
Operating Expenses from Pre-
Pandemic
# of Venues
% of Total
1 (Significantly increased) 31 50%
2 12 19%
3 (Stayed the same) 16 26%
4 3 5%
5 (Significantly decreased
Total 62 100%
Degree of Change in Venue
Operating Expenses From Pre-
Pandemic by Budget Grouping
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
A-B 7 11% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 4 6% 57%
2 1 2% 14%
3 (Stayed the same) 2 3% 29%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased 0% 0%
C-D 28 45% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 12 19% 43%
2 7 11% 25%
3 (Stayed the same) 6 10% 21%
4 3 5% 11%
5 (Significantly decreased 0% 0%
E-F 18 29% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 12 19% 67%
2 1 2% 6%
3 (Stayed the same) 5 8% 28%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased 0% 0%
G 9 15% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 3 5% 33%
2 3 5% 33%
3 (Stayed the same) 3 5% 33%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased 0% 0%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
154
Degree of Change in Operating
Expenses From Pre-Pandemic by
Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 7 11% 44%
2 4 6% 25%
3 (Stayed the same) 5 8% 31%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 9 15% 50%
2 1 2% 6%
3 (Stayed the same) 6 10% 33%
4 2 3% 11%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 3 5% 50%
2 2 3% 33%
3 (Stayed the same) 1 2% 17%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 12 19% 55%
2 5 8% 23%
3 (Stayed the same) 4 6% 18%
4 1 2% 5%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
Total 62 100%
Degree of Change in Operating
Expenses from Pre-Pandemic
# of Venues
% of Total
1 (Significantly increased) 31 50%
2 12 19%
3 (Stayed the same) 16 26%
4 3 5%
5 (Significantly decreased)
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
155
Degree of Change in Operating
Expenses From Pre-Pandemic by
Budget Grouping
# of
Venues
% of Total
% of
Category
A-B 7 11% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 4 6% 57%
2 1 2% 14%
3 (Stayed the same) 2 3% 29%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
C-D 28 45% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 12 19% 43%
2 7 11% 25%
3 (Stayed the same) 6 10% 21%
4 3 5% 11%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
E-F 18 29% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 12 19% 67%
2 1 2% 6%
3 (Stayed the same) 5 8% 28%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
G 9 15% 100%
1 (Significantly increased) 3 5% 33%
2 3 5% 33%
3 (Stayed the same) 3 5% 33%
4 0% 0%
5 (Significantly decreased) 0% 0%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
156
Overall Perception of Managing
Operating Expenses by Major
Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
% of Total -
Extremely/Very
Challenging
% of Category -
Extremely/Very
Challenging
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100% 10% 38%
Extremely challenging 2 3% 13%
Very challenging 4 6% 25%
Moderately challenging 7 11% 44%
Slightly challenging 3 5% 19%
Not challenging at all 0% 0%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100% 15% 50%
Extremely challenging 4 6% 22%
Very challenging 5 8% 28%
Moderately challenging 5 8% 28%
Slightly challenging 2 3% 11%
Not challenging at all 2 3% 11%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100% 5% 50%
Extremely challenging 0% 0%
Moderately challenging 3 5% 50%
Very challenging 2 3% 33%
Slightly challenging 1 2% 17%
Not challenging at all 0% 0%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100% 16% 45%
Extremely challenging 6 10% 27%
Very challenging 4 6% 18%
Moderately challenging 5 8% 23%
Slightly challenging 7 11% 32%
Not challenging at all 0% 0%
Total 62 100%
Overall Perception of Managing
Operating Expenses
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Total -
Extremely/Very
Challenging
Extremely challenging 12 19% 44%
Very challenging 15 24%
Moderately challenging 20 32%
Slightly challenging 13 21%
Not challenging at all 2 3%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
157
Overall Perception of
Managing Operating
Expenses by Budget
Group
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
% of Total -
Extremely/Very
Challenging
% of Category -
Extremely/Very
Challenging
A-B 8 13% 100% 5% 38%
Extremely challenging 3 5% 38%
Very challenging 0% 0%
Moderately challenging 1 2% 13%
Slightly challenging 2 3% 25%
Not challenging at all 1 2% 13%
C-D 28 45% 100% 19% 43%
Extremely challenging 4 6% 14%
Very challenging 8 13% 29%
Moderately challenging 7 11% 25%
Slightly challenging 9 15% 32%
Not challenging at all 0% 0%
E-F 18 29% 100% 15% 50%
Extremely challenging 4 6% 22%
Very challenging 5 8% 28%
Moderately challenging 9 15% 50%
Slightly challenging 0% 0%
Not challenging at all 0% 0%
G 9 15% 100% 5% 33%
Extremely challenging 1 2% 11%
Very challenging 2 3% 22%
Moderately challenging 3 5% 33%
Slightly challenging 2 3% 22%
Not challenging at all 1 2% 11%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
158
Change in Operating Expenses
From Pre-Pandemic to Current
Year - % of Total
Over 50% Increase
21-50% Increase
11-20% Increase
6-10% Increase
1-5% Increase
Stayed the same
Expenses went
down
Don’t Know/Not
Applicable
Rent or lease payments 6% 8% 5% 5% 15% 32% 3% 26%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 2% 3% 5% 3% 23% 2% 63%
Property insurance rates 2% 11% 15% 26% 11% 13% 2% 21%
Maintenance and repair costs 5% 15% 27% 26% 3% 10% 2% 13%
Utility costs 5% 13% 26% 21% 3% 10% 3% 19%
Property taxes 0% 2% 5% 3% 2% 21% 3% 65%
Property maintenance services 2% 11% 19% 10% 10% 15% 3% 31%
Technology and IT Infrastructure 3% 6% 19% 15% 13% 18% 0% 26%
Staff and salaries/wages 2% 6% 15% 27% 21% 10% 5% 15%
Other 0% 14% 7% 0% 0% 7% 0% 71%
3% 8% 15% 15% 9% 16% 2% 32%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
159
Change in Operating Expenses
From Pre-Pandemic to Current
Year by Major Type - % of
Category
Over 50% Increase
21-50% Increase
11-20% Increase
6-10% Increase
1-5% Increase
Stayed the same
Expenses went
down
Don’t Know/Not
Applicable
Community/Civic Spaces
Rent or lease payments 13% 0% 0% 0% 6% 50% 0% 31%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 0% 6% 0% 6% 31% 0% 56%
Property insurance rates 6% 13% 13% 31% 13% 6% 0% 19%
Maintenance and repair costs 13% 6% 38% 19% 6% 13% 0% 6%
Utility costs 13% 6% 44% 6% 0% 25% 0% 6%
Property taxes 0% 0% 6% 13% 6% 13% 0% 63%
Property maintenance services 0% 6% 38% 19% 6% 19% 0% 13%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 6% 0% 31% 6% 31% 0% 25%
Staff and salaries/wages 6% 6% 6% 19% 44% 6% 0% 13%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 25%
Live Performance Spaces
Rent or lease payments 6% 11% 0% 6% 11% 22% 0% 44%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 22% 0% 78%
Property insurance rates 0% 6% 6% 28% 6% 11% 0% 44%
Maintenance and repair costs 0% 17% 17% 33% 0% 0% 0% 33%
Utility costs 6% 6% 17% 22% 0% 0% 0% 50%
Property taxes 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% 83%
Property maintenance services 0% 11% 11% 11% 11% 0% 6% 50%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 6% 28% 11% 11% 6% 0% 39%
Staff and salaries/wages 0% 0% 22% 39% 0% 6% 6% 28%
Other 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 28%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
160
Change in Operating Expenses
From Pre-Pandemic to Current
Year by Major Type - % of
Category
Over 50% Increase
21-50% Increase
11-20% Increase
6-10% Increase
1-5% Increase
Stayed the same
Expenses went
down
Don’t Know/Not
Applicable
Presentation Spaces
Rent or lease payments 0% 0% 17% 0% 33% 50% 0% 0%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 17% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% 67%
Property insurance rates 0% 0% 17% 17% 33% 33% 0% 0%
Maintenance and repair costs 0% 50% 17% 17% 0% 0% 0% 17%
Utility costs 0% 17% 33% 33% 0% 17% 0% 0%
Property taxes 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 67% 0% 33%
Property maintenance services 0% 17% 17% 0% 33% 0% 0% 33%
Technology and IT infrastructure 17% 0% 50% 17% 17% 0% 0% 0%
Staff and salaries/wages 0% 0% 33% 33% 17% 17% 0% 0%
Other 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
Rent or lease payments 5% 14% 9% 9% 18% 23% 9% 14%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 0% 5% 14% 5% 18% 5% 55%
Property insurance rates 0% 18% 23% 23% 9% 14% 5% 9%
Maintenance and repair costs 5% 9% 32% 27% 5% 18% 5% 0%
Utility costs 0% 23% 18% 27% 9% 5% 9% 9%
Property taxes 0% 5% 9% 0% 0% 18% 9% 59%
Property maintenance services 5% 14% 14% 5% 5% 27% 5% 27%
Technology and IT infrastructure 5% 9% 18% 5% 18% 23% 0% 23%
Staff and salaries/wages 0% 14% 9% 23% 23% 14% 9% 9%
Other 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
161
Change in Operating Expenses
From Pre-Pandemic to Current
Year by Budget Group - % of
Category
Over 50% Increase
21-50% Increase
11-20% Increase
6-10% Increase
1-5% Increase
Stayed the same
Expenses went
down
Don’t Know/Not
Applicable
A-B (Up to $100,000)
Rent or Lease Payments 14% 14% 14% 0% 0% 29% 0% 29%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14% 14% 71%
Property insurance rates 0% 29% 14% 14% 0% 14% 0% 29%
Maintenance and repair costs 0% 0% 43% 14% 0% 14% 14% 14%
Utility Costs 0% 0% 14% 14% 0% 14% 14% 43%
Property Taxes 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14% 14% 71%
Property maintenance services 0% 0% 29% 0% 0% 14% 14% 43%
Technology and IT Infrastructure 0% 0% 14% 29% 0% 29% 0% 29%
Staff and Salaries and wages 0% 29% 14% 0% 0% 14% 14% 29%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14%
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000)
Rent or Lease Payments 7% 7% 7% 11% 18% 25% 0% 25%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 0% 4% 4% 7% 21% 0% 64%
Property insurance rates 4% 4% 14% 25% 18% 11% 4% 21%
Maintenance and repair costs 7% 7% 29% 32% 0% 18% 0% 7%
Utility Costs 7% 14% 29% 25% 4% 11% 4% 7%
Property Taxes 0% 4% 7% 7% 4% 21% 0% 57%
Property maintenance services 4% 7% 18% 11% 11% 25% 0% 25%
Technology and IT Infrastructure 4% 7% 11% 11% 14% 21% 0% 32%
Staff and Salaries and wages 4% 4% 7% 21% 32% 14% 7% 11%
Other 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 4% 0% 18%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Operating Expenses
162
Change in Operating Expenses
From Pre-Pandemic to Current
Year by Budget Group - % of
Category
Over 50% Increase
21-50% Increase
11-20% Increase
6-10% Increase
1-5% Increase
Stayed the same
Expenses went
down
Don’t Know/Not
Applicable
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000)
Rent or Lease Payments 6% 11% 0% 0% 11% 44% 11% 17%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 0% 6% 11% 0% 33% 0% 50%
Property insurance rates 0% 11% 17% 39% 6% 17% 0% 11%
Maintenance and repair costs 6% 28% 33% 17% 11% 0% 0% 6%
Utility Costs 6% 17% 28% 17% 6% 6% 0% 22%
Property Taxes 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 22% 6% 67%
Property maintenance services 0% 28% 17% 11% 6% 6% 6% 28%
Technology and IT Infrastructure 6% 6% 22% 22% 17% 17% 0% 11%
Staff and Salaries and wages 0% 6% 22% 44% 22% 0% 0% 6%
Other 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6%
G ($3,000,001 and over)
Rent or Lease Payments 0% 0% 0% 0% 22% 33% 0% 44%
Financing or mortgage costs 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 78%
Property insurance rates 0% 22% 11% 11% 11% 11% 0% 33%
Maintenance and repair costs 0% 22% 0% 33% 0% 0% 0% 44%
Utility Costs 0% 11% 22% 22% 0% 11% 0% 33%
Property Taxes 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 22% 0% 78%
Property maintenance services 0% 0% 22% 11% 22% 0% 0% 44%
Technology and IT Infrastructure 0% 11% 44% 0% 11% 0% 0% 33%
Staff and Salaries and wages 0% 0% 22% 33% 0% 11% 0% 33%
Other 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 33%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Most Challenging Issues
163
*Multiple answers allowed per venue therefore columns and rows do not equal 100%
Most Challenging Issues
By Major Venue Type -
% of Category
Increase in Venue
operating costs
Requirements for
technology
upgrades
Difficulty securing
capital funding
Increase in labour
costs
Deferred
maintenance issues
Attendance/use
levels have not
returned to pre-
pandemic levels
Declines in public
sector operating
support
Requirements for
enhanced
accessibility
Overall decline in
net revenue
Availability of
technical staff
Changing artists’
needs
Regulatory
compliance
changes
Other
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 75% 56% 38% 44% 50% 44% 13% 25% 38% 19% 13% 19% 19% 16
Live Performance Spaces 72% 44% 56% 67% 44% 44% 39% 39% 28% 44% 17% 11% 33% 18
Presentation Spaces 100% 100% 67% 50% 33% 17% 67% 67% 17% 17% 17% 17% 33% 6
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 77% 55% 59% 50% 45% 32% 36% 27% 18% 9% 32% 5% 32% 22
Total 77% 56% 53% 53% 45% 37% 34% 34% 26% 23% 21% 11% 29% 62
Most Challenging Issues
By Budget Group - % of
Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 57% 14% 14% 14% 43% 14% 14% 14% 14% 0% 14% 0% 57% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 75% 61% 54% 43% 46% 36% 21% 29% 25% 18% 18% 18% 29% 28
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 83% 67% 72% 83% 56% 44% 56% 44% 33% 33% 28% 11% 17% 18
G ($3,000,001 and over) 89% 56% 44% 56% 22% 44% 44% 44% 22% 33% 22% 0% 33% 9
Total 77% 56% 53% 53% 45% 37% 34% 34% 26% 23% 21% 11% 29% 62
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
164
Level of Satisfaction with
Current State of Infrastructure
by Major Type - % of Category
Very dissatisfied
Neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied
Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Not sure/ Don’t
know
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 6% 25% 50% 19% 0% 16
Live Performance Spaces 11% 28% 50% 6% 6% 18
Presentation Spaces 17% 33% 17% 33% 0% 6
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 5% 23% 55% 18% 0% 22
Total 8% 26% 48% 16% 2% 62
Level of Satisfaction with
Current State of Infrastructure
by Budget Group - % of Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 14% 14% 43% 29% 0% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 4% 39% 46% 11% 0% 28
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 17% 17% 61% 0% 6% 18
G ($3,000,001 and over) 0% 11% 33% 56% 0% 9
Total 8% 26% 48% 16% 2% 62
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
165
Overall Perspective on Quality of
Venue Infrastructure - % of Total
Very Poor
Poor
Acceptable
Good
Very Good
Don't Know/Not
Applicable
Building structural integrity 2% 3% 18% 37% 37% 3%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 8% 8% 23% 29% 31% 2%
Electrical systems 0% 11% 15% 40% 32% 2%
Safety and security systems 6% 8% 24% 34% 26% 2%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 11% 34% 29% 26% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 3% 15% 21% 31% 27% 3%
Accessibility features 15% 27% 21% 21% 16% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 2% 13% 40% 27% 13% 5%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 2% 21% 31% 26% 19% 2%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 3% 8% 21% 27% 13% 27%
Other 2% 0% 0% 0% 2% 8%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
166
Overall Perspective on Quality of
Venue Infrastructure by Major
Type - % of Category
Very Poor
Poor
Acceptable
Good
Very Good
Don't Know/Not
Applicable
Community/Civic Spaces
Building structural integrity 6% 6% 19% 31% 38% 0%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 6% 0% 31% 38% 25% 0%
Electrical systems 0% 13% 25% 44% 19% 0%
Safety and security systems 6% 19% 38% 19% 19% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 25% 25% 38% 13% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 25% 25% 25% 25% 0%
Accessibility features 19% 13% 38% 13% 19% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 13% 69% 13% 6% 0%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 0% 38% 31% 19% 6% 6%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 6% 13% 25% 19% 13% 25%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 13%
Live Performance Spaces
Building structural integrity 0% 6% 11% 44% 39% 0%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 11% 6% 22% 28% 33% 0%
Electrical systems 0% 17% 11% 44% 28% 0%
Safety and security systems 6% 11% 6% 50% 28% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 11% 44% 17% 28% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 22% 6% 22% 44% 6%
Accessibility features 17% 33% 17% 17% 17% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 6% 22% 33% 22% 11% 6%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 6% 22% 17% 28% 28% 0%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 6% 6% 17% 39% 6% 28%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
167
Overall Perspective on Quality of
Venue Infrastructure by Major
Type - % of Category
Very Poor
Poor
Acceptable
Good
Very Good
Don't Know/Not
Applicable
Presentation Spaces
Building structural integrity 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 0%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 17% 17% 0% 33% 33% 0%
Electrical systems 0% 17% 17% 33% 33% 0%
Safety and security systems 17% 0% 33% 17% 33% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 17% 17% 17% 50% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 0%
Accessibility features 17% 33% 0% 17% 33% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 0% 67% 17% 17% 0%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 0%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 17% 17% 33% 33% 0%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces
Building structural integrity 0% 0% 18% 36% 36% 9%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 5% 14% 23% 23% 32% 5%
Electrical systems 0% 5% 9% 36% 45% 5%
Safety and security systems 5% 0% 27% 36% 27% 5%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 0% 36% 36% 27% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 9% 5% 27% 41% 14% 5%
Accessibility features 9% 32% 18% 32% 9% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 9% 18% 45% 18% 9%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 0% 14% 41% 27% 18% 0%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 5% 23% 23% 14% 36%
Other 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
168
Overall Perspective on Quality of
Venue Infrastructure by Budget
Group - % of Category
Very Poor
Poor
Acceptable
Good
Very Good
Don't Know/Not
Applicable
A-B (Up to $100,000)
Building structural integrity 0% 14% 14% 0% 57% 14%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 0% 0% 43% 0% 43% 14%
Electrical systems 0% 14% 14% 14% 43% 14%
Safety and security systems 14% 14% 14% 29% 29% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 0% 14% 43% 43% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 14% 14% 0% 57% 14%
Accessibility features 29% 14% 0% 43% 14% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 0% 14% 43% 43% 0%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 0% 29% 14% 14% 43% 0%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 14% 0% 14% 29% 43%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14%
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000)
Building structural integrity 4% 0% 25% 46% 25% 0%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 4% 14% 29% 32% 21% 0%
Electrical systems 0% 11% 18% 46% 25% 0%
Safety and security systems 7% 7% 32% 32% 21% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 11% 29% 39% 21% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 4% 14% 29% 46% 7% 0%
Accessibility features 14% 29% 29% 11% 18% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 4% 11% 46% 32% 4% 4%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 4% 18% 32% 36% 7% 4%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 4% 11% 32% 29% 7% 18%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 14%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
169
Overall Perspective on Quality of
Venue Infrastructure by Budget
Group - % of Category
Very Poor
Poor
Acceptable
Good
Very Good
Don't Know/Not
Applicable
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000)
Building structural integrity 0% 6% 11% 39% 39% 6%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 22% 6% 11% 33% 28% 0%
Electrical systems 0% 17% 17% 39% 28% 0%
Safety and security systems 6% 11% 17% 44% 17% 6%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 17% 56% 17% 11% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 6% 17% 22% 22% 28% 6%
Accessibility features 17% 33% 22% 28% 0% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 28% 39% 17% 6% 11%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 0% 28% 39% 22% 11% 0%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 6% 6% 17% 33% 6% 33%
Other 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
G ($3,000,001 and over)
Building structural integrity 0% 0% 11% 33% 56% 0%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 0% 0% 11% 33% 56% 0%
Electrical systems 0% 0% 0% 44% 56% 0%
Safety and security systems 0% 0% 22% 22% 56% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 11% 22% 11% 56% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 11% 0% 22% 67% 0%
Accessibility features 0% 22% 11% 22% 44% 0%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 0% 44% 22% 33% 0%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 0% 11% 22% 11% 56% 0%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 0% 11% 22% 33% 33%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
170
Overall Perspective on Level of
Deferred Maintenance - % of Total
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Don't Know/Not
Applicable
Very High/High
# of Venues
Building structural integrity 6% 3% 8% 31% 47% 5% 10%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 6% 5% 21% 29% 34% 5% 11%
Electrical systems 2% 2% 16% 35% 40% 5% 3%
Safety and security systems 5% 0% 23% 42% 26% 5% 5%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 3% 5% 29% 40% 21% 2% 8%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 5% 5% 29% 24% 27% 10% 10%
Accessibility features 11% 3% 34% 27% 21% 3% 15%
Technology and IT infrastructure 10% 0% 35% 31% 16% 8% 10%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 10% 0% 29% 32% 23% 6% 10%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 3% 2% 11% 29% 24% 31% 5%
Other 0% 2% 3% 0% 2% 5% 2%
62
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
171
Overall Perspective on Level of
Deferred Maintenance by Major
Type - % of Category
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Don't
Know/Not
Applicable
Very High/High
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 16
Building structural integrity 6% 6% 13% 31% 44% 0% 13%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 6% 0% 19% 31% 44% 0% 6%
Electrical systems 0% 0% 19% 56% 25% 0% 0%
Safety and security systems 6% 0% 31% 31% 31% 0% 6%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 13% 31% 31% 25% 0% 13%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 6% 38% 31% 19% 6% 6%
Accessibility features 6% 0% 38% 25% 31% 0% 6%
Technology and IT infrastructure 0% 0% 44% 31% 19% 6% 0%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 6% 0% 25% 44% 19% 6% 6%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 6% 6% 44% 19% 25% 6%
Other 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 13% 0%
Live Performance Spaces 18
Building structural integrity 6% 0% 6% 33% 50% 6% 6%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 6% 0% 17% 33% 39% 6% 6%
Electrical systems 0% 0% 22% 39% 33% 6% 0%
Safety and security systems 0% 0% 22% 39% 33% 6% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 0% 33% 44% 17% 6% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 11% 0% 17% 22% 39% 11% 11%
Accessibility features 17% 0% 33% 28% 17% 6% 17%
Technology and IT infrastructure 6% 0% 44% 22% 17% 11% 6%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 22% 0% 17% 28% 28% 6% 22%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 6% 0% 11% 28% 28% 28% 6%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
172
Overall Perspective on Level of
Deferred Maintenance by Major
Type - % of Category
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Don't
Know/Not
Applicable
Very High/High
# of Venues
Presentation Spaces 6
Building structural integrity 0% 17% 0% 0% 83% 0% 17%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 17% 17% 17% 0% 50% 0% 33%
Electrical systems 0% 17% 0% 33% 50% 0% 17%
Safety and security systems 17% 0% 17% 50% 17% 0% 17%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 17% 0% 50% 33% 0% 17%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 0% 17% 33% 50% 0% 0%
Accessibility features 0% 17% 33% 17% 33% 0% 17%
Technology and IT infrastructure 17% 0% 50% 0% 33% 0% 17%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 0% 0%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 0% 33% 17% 50% 0% 0%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22
Building structural integrity 9% 0% 9% 36% 36% 9% 9%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 5% 9% 27% 32% 18% 9% 14%
Electrical systems 5% 0% 14% 18% 55% 9% 5%
Safety and security systems 5% 0% 18% 50% 18% 9% 5%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 9% 0% 32% 41% 18% 0% 9%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 5% 9% 36% 18% 18% 14% 14%
Accessibility features 14% 5% 32% 32% 14% 5% 18%
Technology and IT infrastructure 18% 0% 18% 45% 9% 9% 18%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 5% 0% 41% 27% 18% 9% 5%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 5% 0% 9% 23% 18% 45% 5%
Other 0% 5% 5% 0% 5% 0% 5%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
173
Overall Perspective on Level of
Deferred Maintenance by Budget
Group
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Don't
Know/Not
Applicable
Very High/High
# of Venues
A-B 7
Building structural integrity 29% 0% 0% 14% 29% 29% 29%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 14% 0% 14% 14% 29% 29% 14%
Electrical systems 14% 0% 0% 14% 43% 29% 14%
Safety and security systems 29% 0% 14% 29% 14% 14% 29%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 14% 0% 29% 29% 14% 14% 14%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 14% 0% 14% 0% 29% 43% 14%
Accessibility features 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 29% 29%
Technology and IT infrastructure 14% 0% 0% 57% 14% 14% 14%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 14% 0% 43% 14% 14% 14% 14%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 0% 0% 14% 29% 57% 0%
Other 0% 0% 14% 0% 0% 14% 0%
C-D 28
Building structural integrity 4% 4% 14% 43% 36% 0% 7%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 0% 4% 29% 39% 29% 0% 4%
Electrical systems 0% 0% 18% 43% 39% 0% 0%
Safety and security systems 0% 0% 29% 46% 25% 0% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 4% 4% 25% 43% 25% 0% 7%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 7% 46% 29% 18% 0% 7%
Accessibility features 4% 0% 46% 29% 21% 0% 4%
Technology and IT infrastructure 11% 0% 32% 29% 21% 7% 11%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 4% 0% 25% 43% 25% 4% 4%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 4% 4% 14% 36% 18% 25% 7%
Other 0% 0% 4% 0% 4% 7% 0%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables: Current State of Facilities
174
Overall Perspective on Level of
Deferred Maintenance by Budget
Group
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Don't
Know/Not
Applicable
Very High/High
# of Venues
E-F 18
Building structural integrity 6% 6% 0% 22% 61% 6% 11%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 6% 11% 17% 28% 33% 6% 17%
Electrical systems 0% 6% 22% 33% 33% 6% 6%
Safety and security systems 6% 0% 11% 44% 28% 11% 6%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 11% 33% 44% 11% 0% 11%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 11% 6% 11% 28% 28% 17% 17%
Accessibility features 22% 6% 28% 33% 11% 0% 28%
Technology and IT infrastructure 6% 0% 44% 39% 0% 11% 6%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 17% 0% 33% 28% 11% 11% 17%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 6% 0% 17% 22% 22% 33% 6%
Other 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6%
G 9
Building structural integrity 0% 0% 11% 22% 67% 0% 0%
Mechanical systems (HVAC, plumbing) 22% 0% 11% 11% 56% 0% 22%
Electrical systems 0% 0% 11% 33% 56% 0% 0%
Safety and security systems 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 0% 0%
Interior finishes (walls, floors) 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 0% 0%
Exterior (roofing, façade) 0% 0% 22% 22% 56% 0% 0%
Accessibility features 11% 0% 22% 22% 44% 0% 11%
Technology and IT infrastructure 11% 0% 56% 0% 33% 0% 11%
Environmental controls (lighting, acoustics) 11% 0% 22% 22% 44% 0% 11%
Aesthetic and historical preservation 0% 0% 0% 33% 44% 22% 0%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Current Utilization
175
Primary Use Typology
Resident/Member/Tenant Use (by in-house or resident artists/organizations): Regular rehearsals,
performances, or exhibitions by resident artists or companies. Studio leases/licenses for space for 6
months or more. Ongoing classes, workshops, or training sessions by in-house staff or resident
organizations. Use of shared space for internal meetings, planning sessions, or organizational
activities.
External Rentals (by external parties): Renting space for performances, exhibitions, or events by
visiting artists or external organizations. Hosting community events, private functions, or public
programs organized by external groups. Short-term use for rehearsals, meetings, or special projects
by individuals or organizations outside the resident groups.
Blended Use: Depending on the event or activity, a combination of resident use and external
rentals. Both regular in-house programming and occasional rentals to external parties.
Typical Venue Use by Major Type
# of Venues
% of Total
% of Category
Community/Civic Spaces 16 26% 100%
Blended Use 11 18% 69%
External Rentals 2 3% 13%
Resident/Member/Tenant Use 3 5% 19%
Live Performance Spaces 18 29% 100%
Blended Use 12 19% 67%
External Rentals 5 8% 28%
Resident/Member/Tenant Use 1 2% 6%
Presentation Spaces 6 10% 100%
Blended Use 5 8% 83%
External Rentals 0% 0%
Resident/Member/Tenant Use 1 2% 17%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22 35% 100%
Blended Use 14 23% 64%
External Rentals 0% 0%
Resident/Member/Tenant Use 8 13% 36%
Total 62 100%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Current Utilization
176
Venue Space Utilization - % of Category
Demand for the
space exceeds
capacity
Space is operating
at full capacity
Space is
underutilized and
regularly has
availability
Operating at Full
Capacity / Demand
Exceeding Capacity
Total # of Spaces
Art Storage (climate controlled) 100% 0% 0% 100% 5
Art Storage (not climate controlled) 33% 67% 0% 100% 3
Artist Studio - Low Impact (e.g., visual, media, literary, unamplified sound) 36% 57% 8% 92% 53
Box Office 0% 100% 0% 100% 1
Classroom or Training Studio (specific to art, dance, or music schools) 27% 23% 50% 50% 22
Creation/Production Space 80% 0% 20% 80% 10
Education and Collaboration Space 0% 27% 73% 27% 15
Exhibition and Gallery Space 0% 97% 3% 97% 37
Indoor Event Space 14% 21% 65% 35% 43
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio 0% 20% 80% 20% 5
Meeting/Conference Space 24% 35% 41% 59% 17
Office/Desk Space 21% 63% 16% 84% 38
Outdoor Event Space 27% 9% 64% 36% 10
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre 9% 27% 64% 36% 11
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall 0% 65% 35% 65% 17
Production Workshop (e.g., staging, scene shop) 0% 50% 50% 50% 4
Public Amenity and Gathering Space 0% 100% 0% 100% 1
Rehearsal Space (not used primarily for public performance or classroom) 6% 22% 72% 28% 32
Screening Room/Cinema/Auditorium 33% 33% 33% 67% 3
Storage Space 0% 100% 0% 100% 1
Technical Training Lab (e.g., media editing suites, CAD labs) 0% 100% 0% 100% 4
Theatre Storage (e.g., set, costumes, props) 25% 75% 0% 100% 3
335
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Current Utilization
177
Venue User Blend by Space - % of Category
Predominantly
Resident Use: 80%
Resident / 20%
External
Mostly Resident
Use: 70% Resident
/ 30% External
Balanced Use: 50%
Resident / 50%
External
Predominantly
External Rentals:
20% Resident / 80%
External
Mostly External
Rentals: 30%
Resident / 70%
External
Other
Predominantly/
Mostly Resident
Use
Total # of Venue
Spaces
Art Storage (climate controlled) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 5
Art Storage (not climate controlled) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 3
Artist Studio - Low Impact (e.g., visual, media, literary, unamplified sound) 79% 19% 2% 0% 0% 0% 98% 53
Box Office 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Classroom or Training Studio (specific to art, dance, or music schools) 41% 5% 36% 18% 0% 0% 45% 22
Creation/Production Space 90% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 10
Education and Collaboration Space 67% 7% 0% 27% 0% 0% 73% 15
Exhibition and Gallery Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 36
Indoor Event Space 33% 9% 19% 23% 16% 0% 42% 43
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio 20% 0% 20% 60% 0% 0% 20% 5
Meeting/Conference Space 53% 0% 29% 18% 0% 0% 53% 17
Office/Desk Space 63% 0% 0% 37% 0% 0% 63% 38
Outdoor Event Space 9% 0% 27% 55% 0% 9% 9% 11
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre 18% 18% 9% 27% 27% 0% 36% 11
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall 29% 24% 29% 12% 6% 0% 53% 17
Production Workshop (e.g., staging, scene shop) 75% 0% 0% 25% 0% 0% 75% 4
Public Amenity and Gathering Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Rehearsal Space (not used primarily for public performance or classroom) 34% 22% 9% 25% 9% 0% 56% 32
Screening Room/Cinema/Auditorium 33% 67% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 3
Storage Space 67% 0% 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 3
Technical Training Lab (e.g., media editing suites, CAD labs) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Theatre Storage (e.g., set, costumes, props) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 4
335
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Current Utilization
178
Venue User Blend by Space and Major Type - % of
Category
Predominantly
Resident Use: 80%
Resident / 20%
External
Mostly Resident
Use: 70% Resident
/ 30% External
Balanced Use: 50%
Resident / 50%
External
Mostly External
Rentals: 30%
Resident / 70%
External
Predominantly
External Rentals:
20% Resident / 80%
External
Other
Predominantly/
Mostly Resident
Use
Total # of Venue
Spaces
Community/Civic Spaces 50% 3% 24% 0% 23% 0% 53% 62
Classroom or Training Studio (specific to art, dance, or music schools) 13% 0% 88% 0% 0% 0% 13% 8
Education and Collaboration Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 8
Indoor Event Space 46% 7% 21% 0% 25% 0% 54% 28
Meeting/Conference Space 67% 0% 0% 0% 33% 0% 67% 3
Office/Desk Space 56% 0% 0% 0% 44% 0% 56% 9
Outdoor Event Space 20% 0% 40% 0% 40% 0% 20% 5
Screening Room/Cinema/Auditorium 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Live Performance Spaces 41% 10% 16% 14% 16% 3% 51% 69
Artist Studio - Low Impact (e.g., visual, media, literary, unamplified sound) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2
Box Office 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Classroom or Training Studio (specific to art, dance, or music schools) 40% 0% 0% 0% 60% 0% 40% 5
Education and Collaboration Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2
Indoor Event Space 0% 14% 0% 86% 0% 0% 14% 7
Meeting/Conference Space 38% 0% 38% 0% 25% 0% 38% 8
Office/Desk Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 3
Outdoor Event Space 0% 0% 33% 0% 33% 33% 0% 3
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre 11% 22% 11% 22% 33% 0% 33% 9
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall 27% 20% 33% 7% 13% 0% 47% 15
Production Workshop (e.g., staging, scene shop) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2
Rehearsal Space (not used primarily for public performance or classroom) 70% 10% 10% 10% 0% 0% 80% 10
Storage Space 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 50% 50% 2
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Current Utilization
179
Venue Utilization by Space Type - % of Category
Predominantly
Resident Use:
80% Resident /
20% External
Mostly
Resident Use:
70% Resident /
30% External
Balanced Use:
50% Resident /
50% External
Mostly
External
Rentals: 30%
Resident / 70%
Predominantly
External
Rentals: 20%
Resident / 80%
Other
Predominantly/
Mostly
Resident Use
Total # of
Venue Spaces
Presentation Spaces 77% 5% 3% 2% 14% 0% 82% 65
Art Storage (climate controlled) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 5
Art Storage (not climate controlled) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Education and Collaboration Space 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 4
Exhibition and Gallery Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 35
Indoor Event Space 25% 0% 25% 25% 25% 0% 25% 4
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio 0% 0% 25% 0% 75% 0% 0% 4
Meeting/Conference Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 3
Office/Desk Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 3
Outdoor Event Space 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall 50% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2
Public Amenity and Gathering Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Screening Room/Cinema/Auditorium 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 61% 14% 5% 2% 17% 0% 76% 139
Art Storage (not climate controlled) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2
Artist Studio - Low Impact (e.g., visual, media, literary, unamplified sound) 78% 20% 2% 0% 0% 0% 98% 51
Classroom or Training Studio (specific to art, dance, or music schools) 67% 11% 11% 0% 11% 0% 78% 9
Creation/Production Space 90% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 10
Education and Collaboration Space 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Exhibition and Gallery Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Indoor Event Space 0% 25% 25% 0% 50% 0% 25% 4
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Meeting/Conference Space 33% 0% 67% 0% 0% 0% 33% 3
Office/Desk Space 57% 0% 0% 0% 43% 0% 57% 23
Outdoor Event Space 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 2
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre 50% 0% 0% 50% 0% 0% 50% 2
Production Workshop (e.g., staging, scene shop) 50% 0% 0% 0% 50% 0% 50% 2
Rehearsal Space (not used primarily for public performance or classroom) 18% 27% 9% 9% 36% 0% 45% 22
Storage Space 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Technical Training Lab (e.g., media editing suites, CAD labs) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1
Theatre Storage (e.g., set, costumes, props) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 4
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Current Utilization
180
Venue Waiting Lists by Space - % of Category
Yes, always
Yes, occasionally
Rarely
Never
Not sure
Total # of Venue
Responses
Art Storage (climate controlled) 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5
Art Storage (not climate controlled) 67% 0% 0% 33% 0% 3
Artist Studio - Low Impact (e.g., visual, media, literary, unamplified sound) 57% 30% 8% 6% 0% 53
Classroom or Training Studio (specific to art, dance, or music schools) 32% 9% 18% 36% 5% 22
Creation/Production Space 0% 80% 0% 20% 0% 10
Education and Collaboration Space 0% 47% 40% 7% 7% 15
Exhibition and Gallery Space 69% 0% 3% 25% 3% 36
Indoor Event Space 14% 26% 33% 26% 0% 42
Media/Film/Sound Recording Studio 0% 60% 0% 40% 0% 5
Meeting/Conference Space 27% 20% 20% 33% 0% 15
Office/Desk Space 3% 3% 3% 89% 3% 36
Outdoor Event Space 20% 10% 20% 40% 10% 10
Performance Space - Black Box or Studio Theatre 18% 64% 0% 9% 9% 11
Performance Space - Theatre, Concert Hall 6% 50% 25% 13% 6% 16
Production Workshop (e.g., staging, scene shop) 0% 0% 33% 67% 0% 3
Public Amenity and Gathering Space 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1
Rehearsal Space (not used primarily for public performance or classroom) 10% 39% 32% 19% 0% 31
Screening Room/Cinema/Auditorium 33% 33% 0% 33% 0% 3
Storage Space 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1
Technical Training Lab (e.g., media editing suites, CAD labs) 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1
Theatre Storage (e.g., set, costumes, props) 0% 0% 0% 50% 50% 4
Total 323
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Regulatory Environment
181
Awareness of Existing Land Use
for Venue Operations
# of Venues
% of Total
No 14 23%
Yes 48 77%
Total 62
Extent of Regulatory Issues
Faced by Venues
Frequently
Occasionally
Rarely
Very Rarely
Not at All
Not applicable
Zoning Regulations 8% 5% 10% 2% 44% 32%
Licensing Requirements 10% 13% 5% 13% 40% 19%
Building Codes and Safety Standards 11% 11% 5% 15% 37% 21%
Noise Ordinances 5% 8% 8% 11% 53% 15%
Environmental Regulations 3% 6% 5% 13% 55% 18%
Historic Preservation Laws 3% 13% 2% 11% 47% 24%
Health and Sanitation Codes 5% 10% 3% 8% 56% 18%
Sub-leasing 5% 5% 3% 8% 58% 21%
Alcohol Regulations 15% 13% 11% 18% 32% 11%
Signage Regulations 8% 11% 6% 10% 47% 18%
Capacity and Crowd Control Regulations 8% 15% 11% 11% 39% 16%
Parking Requirements 19% 21% 5% 10% 32% 13%
Other 2% 0% 2% 0% 3% 8%
Permits or Licenses Obtained for
Venue Operations
# of Venues
% of Total
Rezoning approval 4 6%
Building permit 28 45%
Business license 35 56%
Development permit 20 32%
The owner of the venue in which we
operate has obtained the required permits,
15 24%
I am not aware of any requirements for
permits, licenses, or rezoning
11 18%
Other 10 16%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Regulatory Environment
182
Extent of Regulatory Issues
Faced by Major Type
Frequently
Occasionally
Rarely
Very Rarely
Not at All
Not applicable
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 16
Zoning Regulations 0% 6% 13% 0% 44% 38%
Licensing Requirements 6% 6% 0% 13% 38% 38%
Building Codes and Safety Standards 13% 13% 13% 19% 19% 25%
Noise Ordinances 0% 6% 13% 19% 38% 25%
Environmental Regulations 6% 6% 6% 19% 38% 25%
Historic Preservation Laws 0% 19% 6% 13% 25% 38%
Health and Sanitation Codes 6% 13% 6% 6% 44% 25%
Sub-leasing 6% 6% 6% 13% 38% 31%
Alcohol Regulations 0% 13% 19% 6% 38% 25%
Signage Regulations 0% 19% 6% 6% 38% 31%
Capacity and Crowd Control Regulations 0% 19% 13% 6% 38% 25%
Parking Requirements 13% 25% 6% 6% 31% 19%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 13%
Live Performance Spaces 18
Zoning Regulations 6% 6% 11% 0% 50% 28%
Licensing Requirements 0% 28% 6% 11% 39% 17%
Building Codes and Safety Standards 6% 17% 0% 11% 50% 17%
Noise Ordinances 6% 0% 6% 6% 67% 17%
Environmental Regulations 0% 11% 0% 11% 61% 17%
Historic Preservation Laws 0% 6% 0% 11% 56% 28%
Health and Sanitation Codes 6% 11% 0% 6% 61% 17%
Sub-leasing 6% 11% 0% 0% 67% 17%
Alcohol Regulations 28% 6% 6% 28% 28% 6%
Signage Regulations 11% 6% 11% 17% 39% 17%
Capacity and Crowd Control Regulations 6% 6% 11% 17% 44% 17%
Parking Requirements 22% 22% 6% 11% 28% 11%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 11%
Total
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Regulatory Environment
183
Extent of Regulatory Issues
Faced by Major Type
Frequently
Occasionally
Rarely
Very Rarely
Not at All
Not applicable
# of Venues
Presentation Spaces 6
Zoning Regulations 0% 17% 17% 0% 50% 17%
Licensing Requirements 33% 17% 0% 17% 33% 0%
Building Codes and Safety Standards 17% 33% 0% 0% 50% 0%
Noise Ordinances 33% 17% 0% 17% 33% 0%
Environmental Regulations 17% 17% 0% 17% 33% 17%
Historic Preservation Laws 17% 33% 0% 17% 17% 17%
Health and Sanitation Codes 17% 33% 0% 0% 33% 17%
Sub-leasing 17% 0% 0% 17% 50% 17%
Alcohol Regulations 33% 17% 33% 17% 0% 0%
Signage Regulations 17% 33% 0% 17% 33% 0%
Capacity and Crowd Control Regulations 17% 33% 33% 0% 17% 0%
Parking Requirements 33% 17% 17% 17% 0% 17%
Other 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% 0%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 22
Zoning Regulations 18% 0% 5% 5% 36% 36%
Licensing Requirements 14% 5% 9% 14% 45% 14%
Building Codes and Safety Standards 14% 0% 5% 18% 36% 27%
Noise Ordinances 0% 14% 9% 9% 59% 9%
Environmental Regulations 0% 0% 9% 9% 68% 14%
Historic Preservation Laws 5% 9% 0% 9% 64% 14%
Health and Sanitation Codes 0% 0% 5% 14% 68% 14%
Sub-leasing 0% 0% 5% 9% 68% 18%
Alcohol Regulations 9% 18% 5% 18% 41% 9%
Signage Regulations 9% 5% 5% 5% 64% 14%
Capacity and Crowd Control Regulations 14% 14% 5% 14% 41% 14%
Parking Requirements 18% 18% 0% 9% 45% 9%
Other 5% 0% 0% 0% 5% 5%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Tenure and Stability
184
Level of Venue Ownership by
Major Type - % of Category
Lease/ License
Own
Total
Community/Civic Spaces 63% 38% 16
Live Performance Spaces 83% 17% 18
Presentation Spaces 83% 17% 6
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 68% 32% 22
Total 73% 27% 62
Level of Venue Ownership by
A-B (Up to $100,000) 100% 0% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 68% 32% 28
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 61% 39% 18
G ($3,000,001 and over) 89% 11% 9
Total 73% 27% 62
Level and Type of Venue
Ownership
# of Venues
% of Total
Lease/License 45 73%
City of Calgary 21 34%
Not-for-profit enterprise 5 8%
Private owner 19 31%
Own 17 27%
Not-for-profit enterprise (incl Charity) 13 21%
Private owner 4 6%
Total 62
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Tenure and Stability
185
Lease/License Term by Major
Type - % of Category
Month-to-month
1-2 years
3-5 years
5-10 years
Over 10 years
Other
Total
Community/Civic Spaces 0% 10% 10% 20% 50% 10% 10
Live Performance Spaces 0% 13% 27% 0% 27% 33% 15
Presentation Spaces 0% 0% 20% 40% 40% 0% 5
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 13% 20% 47% 7% 0% 13% 15
Total 4% 13% 29% 11% 24% 18% 45
Lease/License Term by Budget
Group - % of Category
Small Budget (<$500k) 4% 15% 42% 15% 8% 15% 26
Mid-Sized to Large Budget (>$500k) 5% 11% 11% 5% 47% 21% 19
Total
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Tenure and Stability
186
Stability of Lease Tenure - % of
Category
Not expected to
be renewed within
the next 2 years
Not expected to
be renewed within
the next 2-5 years
Not expected to
be renewed within
the next 5-10 years
Secure or
expected to be
renewed for a
minimum period of
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 20% 10% 10% 60% 10
Live Performance Spaces 13% 13% 13% 60% 15
Presentation Spaces 0% 20% 0% 80% 5
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 0% 27% 7% 67% 15
Total 9% 18% 9% 64% 45
Stability of Lease Tenure by
Budget Grouping - % of Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 14% 29% 0% 57% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 0% 21% 11% 68% 19
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 9% 18% 9% 64% 11
G ($3,000,001 and over) 25% 0% 13% 63% 8
Total 9% 18% 9% 64% 46
Recent Changes/
Threats to Lease by
Major Type - % of
Category
No
Yes
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 80% 20% 10
Live Performance Spaces 47% 53% 15
Presentation Spaces 60% 40% 5
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 60% 40% 15
Total 60% 40% 45
Recent Changes/
Threats to Lease by
Budget Group - % of
Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 43% 57% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 63% 37% 19
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 55% 45% 11
G ($3,000,001 and over) 75% 25% 8
Total 60% 40% 45
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Tenure and Stability
187
Number of Previously Leased
Buildings by Major Type
None
1 Building
2 Buildings
3-4 Buildings
5 or More
Buildings
# of Venues
Community/Civic Space 40% 40% 0% 10% 10% 10
Live Performance Spaces 47% 13% 20% 20% 0% 15
Presentation Spaces 0% 0% 40% 20% 40% 5
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 33% 13% 27% 20% 7% 15
Total 36% 18% 20% 18% 9% 45
Number of Previously Leased
Buildings by Budget Group - % of
Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 57% 14% 14% 14% 0% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 47% 11% 11% 26% 5% 19
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 9% 36% 18% 18% 18% 11
G ($3,000,001 and over) 25% 13% 50% 0% 13% 8
Total 36% 18% 20% 18% 9% 45
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Investment Expectations
188
Plans for Expansion or Capital
Expenditures (5-10 yrs) by Major
Type - % of Category
Planning a
significant
expansion
Planning a
moderate
expansion
Considering
expansion but no
definite plans
No plans for
expansion
Not sure / Other
# of Venues
Some level of
planning
undertaken
Community/Civic Spaces 6% 0% 31% 56% 6% 16 6%
Live Performance Spaces 22% 0% 11% 44% 22% 18 22%
Presentation Spaces 33% 0% 50% 17% 0% 633%
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 9% 14% 55% 23% 0% 22 23%
Total 15% 5% 35% 37% 8% 62 19%
Plans for Expansion or Capital
Expenditures (5-10 yrs) by
Budget Group - % of Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 0% 14% 29% 57% 0% 714%
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 11% 4% 50% 29% 7% 28 14%
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 17% 6% 22% 50% 6% 18 22%
G ($3,000,001 and over) 33% 0% 22% 22% 22% 933%
Total 15% 5% 35% 37% 8% 62 19%
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Investment Expectations
189
Scale of Capital Expenditures
Plans (5-10 yrs) by Major Type -
% of Category
Significant capital
expenditures
Moderate capital
expenditures
Minor capital
expenditures
No planned capital
expenditures
Not sure / Other
Total
Community/Civic Spaces 13% 25% 25% 31% 6% 16
Live Performance Spaces 28% 11% 44% 11% 6% 18
Presentation Spaces 33% 17% 33% 17% 0% 6
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 14% 27% 41% 18% 0% 22
Total 19% 21% 37% 19% 3% 62
Scale of Capital Expenditures
Plans (5-10 yrs) by Budget Group
- % of Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 0% 0% 43% 57% 0% 8
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 11% 25% 50% 14% 0% 28
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 22% 28% 17% 22% 11% 18
G ($3,000,001 and over) 56% 11% 33% 0% 0% 9
Total 19% 21% 37% 19% 3% 62
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Investment Expectations
190
Focus of Capital Expenditures
Plans (5-10 yrs) by Major Type -
% of Category
Amenities
upgrades
Environmental
upgrades
Maintenance
upgrades
Making the space
more accessible
Technology
upgrades
Other
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 27% 0% 27% 18% 27% 0% 11
Live Performance Spaces 19% 6% 19% 25% 13% 19% 16
Presentation Spaces 20% 0% 40% 20% 20% 0% 5
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 6% 0% 33% 11% 44% 6% 18
Total 16% 2% 28% 18% 28% 8% 50
Focus of Capital Expenditures
Plans (5-10 yrs) by Budget Group
- % of Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 33% 0% 67% 0% 0% 0% 3
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 8% 4% 38% 13% 38% 0% 24
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 21% 0% 7% 29% 21% 21% 14
G ($3,000,001 and over) 22% 0% 22% 22% 22% 11% 9
Total 16% 2% 28% 18% 28% 8% 50
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Confidence Level
191
Perspective on Current Financial
Situation vs Pre-Pandemic by
Major Type - % of Category
1 (Significantly
worse)
2
3
4
5 (Significantly
better)
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 0% 13% 63% 25% 0% 16
Live Performance Spaces 11% 6% 44% 28% 11% 18
Presentation Spaces 0% 0% 83% 0% 17% 6
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 18% 14% 36% 23% 9% 22
Total 10% 10% 50% 23% 8% 62
Perspective on Current Financial
Situation vs Pre-Pandemic by
Budget Grouping - % of Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 14% 0% 43% 29% 14% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 7% 7% 54% 21% 11% 28
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 17% 22% 39% 17% 6% 18
G ($3,000,001 and over) 0% 0% 67% 33% 0% 9
Total 10% 10% 50% 23% 8% 62
Appendix 2 Venue Survey Data Tables – Confidence Level
192
Likelihood of Operating in
Calgary in Five Years by Major
Type - % of Category
Very likely
Somewhat likely
Not at all likely
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 75% 25% 0% 16
Live Performance Spaces 78% 22% 0% 18
Presentation Spaces 83% 17% 0% 6
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 77% 23% 0% 22
Total 77% 23% 0% 62
Likelihood of Operating in
Calgary in Five Years by Budget
Grouping
A-B (Up to $100,000) 57% 43% 0% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 82% 18% 0% 28
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 67% 33% 0% 18
G ($3,000,001 and over) 100% 0% 0% 9
Total 77% 23% 0% 62
Perspective on Risk of
Redevelopment or Tenure by
Major Type - % of Category
Yes
No
# of Venues
Community/Civic Spaces 13% 88% 16
Live Performance Spaces 50% 50% 18
Presentation Spaces 33% 67% 6
Production/Rehearsal Spaces 32% 68% 22
Total 32% 68% 62
Perspective on Risk of
Redevelopment or Tenure by
Budget Grouping - % of Category
A-B (Up to $100,000) 43% 57% 7
C-D ($100,001 - $500,000) 32% 68% 28
E-F ($500,001 - $3,000,000) 39% 61% 18
G ($3,000,001 and over) 11% 89% 9
Total 32% 68% 62
Appendix 3 Documents Reviewed
193
•2020 West Anthem Music Ecosystem Study – Sound Diplomacy
•2020 Economic Impact Assessment of CADA Grant Recipients
•2021 Performing Art Lodge YYC Final Report – Angie Gelinas & Associates
•2021 Looking at Indigenous Performing Arts on the Territory Known as Canada – Primary
Colours
•2021 Eventful City Strategy – Public Report Back What We Heard
•2021 Eventful City Strategy – Stakeholder Report Back What We Heard
•2021 – 2026 Canada Council for the Arts Strategic Plan – What We Heard Report
•2022 Calgary Creative Congress - Creative Spaces Breakaway Sessions Report
•2022 Concentration of Artists in Canada
•2022 Demographic Profile of Calgary’s Arts Sector
•2022 Chinatown Cultural Plan
•2022 CCVO Alberta’s Non-Profit Sector: Too Essential to Fail
•2023 West Anthem Music City Strategies – Phase 1-3 Reports
•2023 CreativeCity Community Engagement Summary
•2019 - 2023 Civic Partner Annual Reports
•2023 Calgary Creative Space - Information Gathering Session Report
•2023 Arts Professionals Survey data
•2023 cSPACE Art Space Survey
•2023 Creative Spaces Mentoring Network Participants
•2023 cSPACE Projects Spacepilot Meanwhile Use Data
•2019 - 2023 CADA Operating Grant reporting data - venues and programming
•Culture Sector Engagement/Evidence/Strategy
•2007 Current State of Cultural Spaces for the Arts in Calgary – Community Engagement
Dialogue series
•2007 Current State of Cultural Spaces for the Arts in Calgary – Research Report
•2008 Reclaiming Calgary’s Cultural Identity – Arts Spaces Strategy and Capital Plan
•2008 Results of CADA Arts Space Investment Process Report
•2009 Regional Cultural Facilities Dialogue Report – Alberta Culture
•2010 CADA Space Market Survey – Artists and NPOs
•2013 Calgary Cultural Facilities Inventory – Supplementary Research Barlow & Associates
•2014 Living a Creative Life – An Arts Development Strategy for Calgary
•2014 Living a Creative Life – Ta ct ic al P la n
•2016 City of Calgary Cultural Plan
•2017 Building on our Momentum – Arts and Culture Infrastructure
•2017 Update on the Cultural Plan for the City of Calgary – CPS Report
•2018 Calgary Digital Media Strategy
•2019 Centre City Plan Refresh – Culture and Activity Brief
•2019 Conference Board of Canada Calgary’s Creative Industries - Economic and Strategic
Impact
•2019 Conference Board of Canada Labour Market Information Study of the Cultural Labour
Force
•2020 Arts Professionals Survey + Focus Group Reports
•2020 Calgary CreativeCity Ecosystem Report
•2020 Future of the Live Experience Economy - Discussion Paper
Appendix 3 Documents Reviewed
194
•2021 Destination Strategy - To u r i s m C a l g a r y
•2022 Beltline Area Redevelopment Plan
•2022 North Hill Communities Local Area Plan
•2023 Chinook Communities Local Area Plan
•2023 Riley Communities Local Area Plan
•2022 Eventful City Strategy
•2022 Winter City Strategy
•2022 Corporate Asset Management Plan
•2022 Resilient Calgary – Council’s Strategic Direction 2023-2026
•2022 My Forest Lawn Centre – Phase I and Phase II Stakeholder Report Back Reports
•2022 An Action Plan for Alberta’s Screen Production Workforce
•2023 Non-Market Housing Land Disposition Policy
•2023 - 2026 Service Plans and Budgets
•2023 - 2026 Calgary Public Libraries Strategic Plan
•2023 - 2026 Tourism Calgary Business Plan
•2023 Non-Profit Tax Mitigation Policy
•2023 Updated Guide for Local Area Planning
•2023 Greater Forest Lawn Communities Local Area Plan
•Municipal Planning/Policies/Strategies
•2011 Triple Bottom Line Policy Framework
•2012 Lease Policy for Non-Profit Organizations in City-Owned Buildings Intended for Future
Demolition
•2014 New Community Planning Guidebook - MDP
•2016 Centre City Guidebook - MDP
•2017 Investing in Partnerships Policy
•2017 City Centre Guidebook
•2018 Developed Areas Guidebook - MDP
•2018 Updated Capital Infrastructure Investment Principles
•2018 Corporate Facility Planning and Delivery Policy
•2018 Corporate Facility Planning and Delivery Framework
•2019 Policy to Guide Discretion for Secondary Suites and Backyard Suites
•2019 Calgary in the New Economy
•2019 Incentive Density Calculation Method
•2020 Overview of Municipal Density Bonusing Policies – PUD Report
•2020 Corporate Facility Planning and Delivery Framework
•2019 Social Wellbeing Policy
•2020 Next 20: Making Life Better for Calgarians - State of the City
•2021 Sustainable Building Policy
•2021 Calgary Greater Downtown Plan
•2021 Heritage Value Analysis – Conservation Tool – Phase 1Report
Appendix 3 Documents Reviewed
195
•Infrastructure Funding Trends
Government of Canada
•2017 Creative Canada Policy Framework
•2018 Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program – Alberta Bilateral Agreement
•2018 A Vision for Cultural Hubs and Districts in Canada
•2019 Audit of the Management Control Framework for the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund
•2008 – 2023 data for Canada Cultural Spaces Fund
•2022 – 23 Canadian Heritage Departmental Results Report
•2024 Canadian Heritage Canada Cultural Spaces Fund Evaluation (August 2024)
•2023 – 2024 Canadian Heritage Departmental Plan
•2024 Guidelines for Canada Cultural Spaces Fund
Province of Alberta
•2008 – 2023 data for Community Facilities Enhancement Program
•2008 - 2023 data for Municipal Sustainability Initiative approved projects
•2020 data for Municipal Stimulus Program
•2021 – 24 Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women Business Plan
•2022 – 2023 Alberta Culture Annual Reports
•2023 - 26 Alberta Culture Ministry Business Plan
•2022 - 23 Alberta Foundation for the Arts Annual Report
•2024 – 2026 budget allocations to Local Government Fiscal Framework
•2023 - 2026 Capital Plan Details by Ministry
•2019 – 2023 AFA Operational funding data
City of Calgary/CADA
•2008 Arts Space Investment Process Guidelines
•2014 Cultural Space Investment Process Guidelines
•2014-2023 City of Calgary Investing in Community Priorities – Infrastructure Investment Plans
for Culture Parks and Recreation
•2016 Cultural MSI Overview and Recommendations – CPS Report
•CMSI funding participant interview data
•2021 Reprioritization of Cultural Municipal Sustainability Initiative Budget Funds – PFC report
•2022 data for Community Revitalization Levy
•2022 data for Downtown Plan Fund
•2022 Centre City Levy Annual Report
•2022 Off-site Levy Annual Report
•2023 - 2026 Service Plans and Budgets – Summary of Business Cases for Proposed Capital
Investments
Calgary Foundation
•Calgary Foundation Annual Reports
•Impact Investing Summary
Appendix 3 Documents Reviewed
196
•Real Estate Trends
•2023 Industrial Area Growth Strategy Consulting Report – Phase 1 and 2
•2023 Real Estate Indicators Summary – Calgary Economic Development
•2023 Calgary Office Insight – JLL
•2023 Calgary and Area Industrial Insight – JLL
•2023 Calgary Office Market Report – Avison Young
•2023 Downtown Office Market Analysis – Barclay Street
•2023 Suburban Office Market Analysis – Barclay Street
•2023 Beltline Office Market Analysis – Barclay Street
•2023 Retail Market Analysis – Barclay Street
•2023 CBRE Canada Major City Retail Rent Survey
•2023 Housing Needs Assessment
•2024 – 2030 Home is Here - Calgary’s Housing Strategy
•2024 City of Calgary Property Assessment - Market Report
•2024 City of Calgary Property Assessment – Office Market Trends
•Population and Economic Trends
•2018 Preliminary Resilience Assessment
•2022 Why Calgary? Our Economy in Depth
•2022 Citywide Growth Strategy Monitoring Report
•2022 Calgary Equity Index and Mapping – Access to Community Spaces, Transit Score, Walk
Score
•2022 Beneath the Surface – The Layers of Poverty in Calgary
•2022 Equity-Deserving Communities in Calgary
•2022 Poverty Snapshot in Calgary – Vibrant Communities Calgary
•2022 The Young and Restless – Western Youth Migration - Canada West Foundation
•2022 Work to Live – Alberta Youth Mobility – Canada West Foundation
•2023 – 2028 Calgary and Region Economic Outlook
•2023 Calgary’s Living Wage – Vibrant Communities Calgary
•2023 Indigenous Economic Contribution Study
•2023 Calgary Labour Force Characteristics
•2023 National Vital Signs Report – Reconnecting Communities
Appendix 3 Documents Reviewed
197
•Citizen Engagement/Evidence
•2016 Olympic Plaza Culture District Engagement and Design Report
•2017 Culture Track - Alberta Culture Study
•2021 Greater Downtown Perceptions Survey
•2023/24 Spotlight on Arts Audiences – Stone-Olufson
•2023 Building Experiences in the New Economy – Stone-Olufson
•2022 Arts Education Benchmark Survey Summary – Stone-Olufson
•2022 Equity in Service Delivery Fund Research
•2018 - 2022 CADA Calgary Engagement Surveys
•2020 Tomorrow’s Chinatown – Culture Plan Discover Phase Report
•2022 Tomorrow’s Chinatown – Cultural Plan Engagement Insights
•2019 - 2023 Calgary Foundation Vital Signs & Quality of Life reports
•2019 – 2023 Survey of Calgarians/Perspectives on Calgary/Attitudes and Outlook reports
•2023 City Building Program Phase 1 – Public Engagement What We Heard Report
Appendix 4 City of Calgary Proposed Land Use Table and Definitions
198
(H-1)
(H-2)
(H-3)
MU-1 MU-
1c
MU-2 MU-
2c
MU-3 MU-
3c
GD-1
GD-1
GD-1
C-1
C-1V
C-2
C-3
I-F
I-G
I-H
S-NA
S-PS
S-RC
S-PI
S-TC
S-FD
Home Business DD DD D D D D D D/E D/E D D D D
Housing PPPP D D D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D D D D
Supportive Housing PPPP D D D D/E D/E D/E D/E D D D D
Cannabi s Store DDDDDDDDDDDD
Chi l d Care Service DD DD D D D D D D D D D D D D D
Distillery DDDDDDDDDDDDD
Drive Through D D D D D
Food & Beverage Service D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D D D/E D
Health Care Service D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E DD/E
Hotel D D D D D/E D/E D D D D
Indoor Sales & Service D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D D D
Minor Indoor Entertainment D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E DD/E
Major Indoor Entertainment DD/E D D D D/E D
Neighbourhood Store DP
Office D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E DD/E
Outdoor Café D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D
Outdoor Entertainment D D D D
Outdoor Sales & Service D D D
Parking Facility D D D D D D D D D
Recreation Facility D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D D P D/E
Self Storage Facility DDD D/E D/E D D D D
Small-Scale Manufacturing DDD D/E D/E DDDDPDD
Supermarket D D D D D/E D/E D/E D D
Temporary Sales Centre D D D D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E P P P P
Vehicle Service D D D D D D D
INDUS T RIAL
SPECIAL PURPOSE
RE S I D E NT I AL
COM M E RCIA L
HOUS I NG
MIXED USE
GREATER DOWNTOWN
COM M E RCIA L
Source: 2024 Draft City of Calgary Zoning Bylaw, City of Calgary
•Home Business
•Definition: Means a development where a business is operated
primarily inside a dwelling unit or an accessory building by a resident
of that dwelling unit. A Residential use is the primary development
on the site and the business activity is secondary. This use includes
Home Based Child Care. This use does not include activities similar
to those offered as bars, retail stores, or nightclubs. Former uses
include Live Work Unit, Artists Studio, Home Occupation – Class 1
and 2
•Indoor Sales & Service
•Means a use where a business offers the general retail sale or rental
of goods and services inside a building This use may include a limited,
ancillary outdoor sales or service area. This use does not include
Supermarkets. Former uses include Artists Studio, Retail and
Consumer Service, Instructional Facility
•Major Indoor Entertainment
•Means a use where indoor facilities are used for entertainment,
conferences, and music or sporting events. This activity is typically a
regional or city-wide attraction, generates a significant number of
trips, or is likely to have major land use impacts. Former uses include
Dinner Theatre, Cinema, Conference and Event Facility, Night Club,
Performing Ar ts Centre, Museum
•Minor Indoor Entertainment
•Means a use where indoor facilities are used for entertainment. This
activity is typically a local or district attraction, is likely to have
minimal off-site impacts, generates fewer or sporadic trips, and may
create minimal land use impacts. Former uses include Museum,
Cinema
Appendix 4 City of Calgary Proposed Land Use Table and Definitions
199
Crematorium D D P
Industrial DDPDD DD
Heavy Industrial D D
Outdoor Storage P D D D
Cemetery P
Community Servi ce D D D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D D D/E P
Funeral Service D/E D/E D/E D/E
Health Care Facility D
Library D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D P P
Major Utili ty D D D D D D P D P D D
Minor Utility PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPDPPPPP
Natural Area P P P P P P
Outdoor Recreation D D D D D D D P D D D
Park P P P P
Protective & Emergency Service PPPP P P P P P P P P P P D P P P P P
Recycling Drop-Off Depot D D D D D
Religious Facility DD DDDDD/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D D D
School DDDD/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D/E D P P
Special Event PPPPPPPPPPPP PPP
Agri cul ture P P
Urban Agriculture PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP DPPPP
Sign Class A PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Sign Class B PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPDPPPPP
Sign Class C D D D D/E D/E D/E D D D D D D D D P P D D D D D D
Sign Class D DP P P D D P P P P P P P P D D D P P P
Sign Class E D D D D/E D/E D/E DDDDDDDDDD DDD
Sign Class F D D D D D D D
Sign Class G D D D D D D
GREATER DOWNTOWN
COM M E RCIA L
INDUS T RIAL
SPECIAL PURPOSE
INS T IT UT IONAL
AG
SIGNS
HOUS I NG
MIXED USE
INDUS T RIAL
Source: 2024 Draft City of Calgary Zoning Bylaw, City of Calgary
•Small-Scale Manufacturing
•Means a use that manufactures, repairs or creates custom products
that may be sold to customers or commercial businesses in an
indoor or outdoor location. Products may be consumed on-site
where associated with food and beverage production activities. The
use does not produce land use impacts outside of the building. This
use does not include industrial.
•Office
•Means a use where the main activity is to provide professional,
management, administrative, consulting, or financial services.
•Outdoor Entertainment
•Means a use where people gather outdoors for entertainment
purposes that typically require large spaces. Supporting activities may
include merchandise, food, or drink sales. These activities frequently
produce land use impacts.
•Industrial
•Means a use where one or more of the following activities occur: 1)
processing raw materials; 2) manufacturing, cleaning, servicing,
repairing or testing materials, goods and equipment; 3) handling,
storing, or shipping equipment, goods, and materials; 4) training,
research and development laboratories; or 5) distributing and selling
materials, goods and equipment to institutions and industrial and
commercial businesses. The use does not produce noise, heat, glare,
dust, smoke, fumes, odours, vibrations, or other external impacts
beyond the parcel boundaries.
Appendix 4 City of Calgary Proposed Land Use Table and Definitions
200
Source: 2024 Draft City of Calgary Zoning Bylaw, City of Calgary
•Community Service
•Means a use where institutional, cultural, social, arts, and educational
activities that provide a service to the public occur. This use does not
include Child Care Service, Library, or School.
•Library
•Means a use where municipal spaces or buildings have a collection of
books, art, music, video, programs, or other reference and creative
materials available for people to use or borrow
•Religious Facility
•Means a use where people assemble for religious or spiritual
purposes. This use may provide occasional refuge for people, may
have a Child Care Service, food preparation, kitchen, service and
seating area within the building.
•Special Event
•Means a use where temporary structures are erected for a limited
amount of time to accommodate temporary activities.
© 2021 –AEA Consulting LLC
Project Team
Reid Henry / rhenry@aeaconsulting.com
Daniel Payne / dpayne@aeaconsulting.com
Mariana Gomez-Mendoza / mgomez@aeaconsulting.com
+1 845 765 8100
