Author Archives: André Natta

Why is the downtown Publix really a game-changer?

newPublixbldgThe term “game-changer” has been batted about metro Birmingham a lot in recent days as news of a planned mixed-use development anchored by a Publix grocery store on the city’s Southside spread like wild fire. For those who haven’t heard yet, an article in the May 18 edition of The Birmingham News revealed the Lakeland, FL-based grocer as the main tenant of a $30 million development proposed to sit on the northwest corner of 20th Street and 3rd Avenue South.

Now, I’ve lived in the greater downtown area since 2004, and I’ve always had as few as four and as many as six major options available to choose from within 2 miles, but I had to drive to them. When people ask me “Where and how do you get groceries?” I admit I’ve long ago started replying by asking them, “Well, where and how do you get yours?” I get a stunned look, but most times they seem to get what I’m saying. That said, it’s not an option readily or easily available to a significant number of our city’s residents.

This leads to my first reason why it’s a game-changer:

It’s more about WALKING now than DRIVING. Yes, there’s a parking deck that will sit between the ground floor space and the 36 “loft-style” apartments planned for the top the building. The vehicles using these spaces though will be off-street and out of sight. The idea of needing to circle forever to find a spot or the installation of a surface parking lot to handle capacity doesn’t even come up in conversation – and that’s a great thing. It suggests developers realize there will be enough people within walking distance to support its operation. It takes away reliance on an automobile to make a development like this one work.

It means it should be easier to get other national and regional retailers to consider locating a business downtown. It also makes it easier to get those same retailers to start looking at options in neighborhoods throughout the city. It could potentially make the issue of placing parking immediately adjacent to their business less of a sticking point. Dare it be suggested it could also be the first step toward a re-write of the city’s parking regulations and a rethinking of its minimum requirements?

It’s downtown. Actually, this may be an even bigger issue for me and one I’m excited about watching evolve. The proposed building is sitting along 20th Street South. When I first moved here nearly ten years ago, I referred to that area as being downtown while having a conversation with a native; I was chastised immediately because “it was not downtown, it was Southside. Downtown starts on the other side of the tracks.”

It was weird, as most New Yorkers refer to pretty much all of Manhattan as “downtown” no matter which of the other four boroughs you live. I’d also moved here after working for an agency charged with the revitalization of “greater Downtown” Savannah, not just its famous historic district. As a result, I’ve long considered the areas surrounding the city center part of greater downtown Birmingham. It makes sense especially when you get a chance to see just how small the expanded area still is in relation to the rest of the city.

The announcement of this grocery store lends itself to a new approach involving population growth in the urban core focused on eventually seeing people choosing to live in the single-family home dense portions of Druid Hills, Fountain Heights, and Norwood (in addition to others like Titusville, Smithfield, and College Hills) after spending a couple of years living in an apartment located nearby in the city center. Every major news outlet in the city referred to the project’s location area as downtown, suggesting the shift in perspective (one long championed by REV Birmingham and its predecessors) is finally starting to happen. The change in perspective also means a realization about the choices available to someone thinking about their next move.

The changes that come as a result of this and other projects will be quick. The changes at face value will be good for the city. The question right now as we get ready to start watching this happen is “Are we ready for what we’ve been asking for all of these years?”

André Natta is the stationmaster for bhamterminal.com.

For some, it's about a lot more than a "sign"

PepsisignmidinstallSt. Patrick’s Day reminds me I’m a product of Catholic schools in New York City. The first nine years were because my parents told me so; the last four were by choice. The result was being greatly influenced by the thirst for knowledge central to the core of the Augustinian and Marist traditions. A summarizing of that thirst is the need to seek knowledge, particularly the truth. In order to accomplish this, you have to remind yourself often to look at the entire scope of a project – not just the part central to whatever fight you hold dear.

Perhaps that’s why I’ve been laughing at some of the commentary about the dislike of the Pepsi sign. Among the popular arguments presented against those speaking out about it is that there are bigger issues affecting the city of Birmingham. After all, it’s a little ridiculous to be all worked up over a sign paid for by a long-time Birmingham-based business advertising a New York-based multi-national business founded in North Carolina, right? (Granted, that’s the least of PepsiCo’s problems right now…)

Yes, here are a lot of major issues facing the general population of Birmingham. However, if you think about the original reason for the sign it is covering, its placement, and its visibility, you realize it speaks more to the pecking order of major issues affecting the region. At least, that’s why I’ve been vocal about the sign. I’ll explain:

Those finding issues with the installation of the advertisement probably wouldn’t be as vocal as they are if the skirting of city law wasn’t flaunted in their faces in the form of a party overlooking the city. While forgotten in recent years, the display board it covers was installed to brag about the potential for Birmingham as part of its centennial. It leaves many, including myself, wondering if the choruses wouldn’t have been muted ever so slightly if the money spent on this unveiling were publicly shared with one of the city’s missions or outreach programs, tackling an issue of significance directly. Well?

The sign is visible from much of the city proper, especially areas west of downtown. When poverty grips approximately 30% of our city (or more based on the screenshot of an interactive map created by The New York Times earlier this year), does it give them hope as they see a sign installed for an undisclosed amount of money advertising one of many soft drinks that lends itself to the state’s ranking among states fighting obesity (regardless if it places us in the top 5 or farther down the upper reaches of that kind of list)?

PovertyinAL

When quality affordable housing is not a reality for many and the ability to find some in an area that allows you to get to work and have access to the basics is increasingly hard for citizens, what does that sign say to them? How many homes could be renovated or built with those funds? Whether intended or not, and regardless of where the conversation is taking place – fellowship halls, barber shops, libraries, parks, living rooms, or Facebook – discussions are taking place that vocal online participants aren’t as plugged into as we may believe.

Maybe the sign serves as a more powerful mirror to the community about its priorities, placing corporate objectives above the social needs of the city? What if you’re so concerned with fighting against “the man” that you blow off people willing to help with some piece of a solution? Could a removal of the advertisement include monies being given to those organizations and initiatives working to battle the bigger issues? The need to polish a public image can lead to some interesting partnerships, but we may not find out.

Recent weeks have reminded me of just how polarized a community can become, potentially keeping people from realizing they might be working towards the same goals. The opportunity for those partnerships to be forged and acted upon become harder when antagonistic baiting of a captive audience becomes more entertaining to some instead of digging a little deeper to find out how others may tick. There are far more constructive ways to make noise and hold up that mirror than saying there’s only one way to fight a battle. The city will move forward in spite of the nitpicking. It could move a lot farther if it was more civil. We’d also do a lot better of we looked at the entire situation when thinking about how to tackle one piece. Isolating yourself from being a true part of the solution is a sad thing indeed.

Maybe it’s time to rewrite former UAB president Joseph Volker‘s famous quote? Instead of dreaming “too-little dreams,” we need to start accomplishing more and more goals. The pointing, waving, and name-calling is doing more to destroy potential progress before it even begins, though it’s being done in the name of raising awareness. Awareness is needed, but so is the need to recognize how to act like adults and agree to disagree.

Otherwise, we do a great disservice to Birmingham if we continue to isolate, name-call, and posture too childishly.

André Natta is the stationmaster of bhamterminal.com.

More numbers (and theories) to study with the Haney deal

Social_Security_Building_(1974)There’s been a great deal of conversation about the proposed lease agreement that would see the City of Birmingham occupy more than 263,000 square feet of space in the former Social Security building, particularly about the PAC transfers John Archibald has written about in several widely-read pieces for AL.com.

Campaign finance reform is a major issue, and one worthy of scrutiny at any time – especially during an election year. I’m looking forward to seeing what else John is able to uncover in the coming days and weeks and to the public responses to the allegations. I’d like to look at something else today though – the deal itself and a crazy theory as to why it’s being floated in the first place.

Let’s run the deal’s numbers too

The proposed deal’s lease rate is what’s most significant. John references $139 million over 30 years. His fellow AL.com journalist Joseph Bryant, as late as the morning of February 17, was referencing $127 million as the figure. It makes a big difference. John’s figure works out to $17.62 per square foot per year for the life of the lease while Joseph’s comes to $16.10/sq. ft. The current average rate for office rentals in Birmingham, AL proper according to LoopNet is $16.72/sq. ft., making Joseph’s figure look very favorable for the city (even if the length of the lease is questionable – more on that shortly).

John’s figure looks favorable depending on how you believe the deal would be structured normally. If Haney used $16.11, the average for the metro area, as a baseline with an annual 3% increase applied, it’s the equivalent of what the year 4 rate would be – again, something quite favorable to the city. If Haney decided to look at the rate as escalating every five (5) years, it’s the equivalent of the year 20 rate, one much more favorable to him.

Looking at those numbers, concerned citizens’ comments, and the dollar amounts being floated around via pro-forma comparisons, the biggest issue monetarily is the lease’s length. It seems as though there’s a plan (or at least a perceived, albeit limited) desire to get this done as soon as possible, but you could see what Boston’s newly elected mayor (and one Fast Company says we need to watch) Martin Walsh does with his City Hall and hold it up as an example. Here’s the PDF of the proposal candidate Walsh floated during his campaign.

The point? The lease shouldn’t be 30 years long (and the city should be looking elsewhere for viable options); it should be long enough for the city to identify and complete its long-term plans. We can tackle non-traditional options in a future piece, but needless to say the deal should continue to be called into question for several reasons.

Why are we doing this again?

My somewhat twisted observations lead to a discussion about the other issue that hasn’t been getting attention – why is the city looking to consolidate police, fire, and the municipal court into one space in the first place? The answer becomes more apparent when you look at the fair market values applied to the city-owned properties in question.

While private citizens pay property taxes on their residences and commercial properties to the city, Birmingham doesn’t pay them to itself, so it gets a chance to see a double benefit from vacating these structures if they put the properties up for sale. First, there’s the instant benefit from selling them off (leading to an instant infusion of cash into a city that’s seen several years of tenuous budget negotiations). There’s also the ability to collect property taxes in addition to sales taxes and business taxes depending on how the land’s used.

How much could they bring in for the properties in question? If you add up the fair market values of all the city owned land occupied and/or adjoining the existing facilities, it would be questionable if Birmingham let go of it all for less than $9.5 million. Note this is based on the fair market value assigned by the county tax assessor; the actual amount received could be much higher depending on demand. Any new structures or redevelopment of the property would be sure to increase that value, only adding to the potential long-term revenue.

Downtown Birmingham is a hot market, with several developments planned for the area surrounding the most valuable of the three sets of land – police headquarters. The projects scheduled for completion around it stand to completely remake downtown – while adding significant value to the Fountain Heights neighborhood (yes, that’s Fountain Heights):

We could also talk about its proximity to Innovation Depot, Railroad Park, Regions Field, and all of the residential developments announced and unannounced for that portions of Southside. Do we finally see a new grocery store for downtown (one its residents will be willing to support)? Is additional residential development possible (resulting in a different amount of taxes collected)? Might we see another skyscraper climb toward the sky downtown? Money and politics are definitely front and center, but we should look at all the ways they’re involved in this instance.

André Natta is the stationmaster for bhamterminal.com.

An open letter to Al Roker

Mr. Roker:

Pardon the formality, but the folks at Mt. St. Michael Academy in the Bronx would be upset with me if I didn’t maintain it to a certain degree while writing this note. The previous sentence would suggest correctly that I’m a native of New York City, one who can claim to have grown up watching your forecasts on WNBC-TV until heading off to college in Georgia in 1993. I’ve been a fan for a long time and have appreciated the frankness over the years (I’m specifically thinking about our freak snow storm in early March 1993).

I’m writing not to question your comments about the recent handling of the winter storm in Atlanta – that seems fairly spot on given the information at hand – but to question the generalizations made during the start of the 9 a.m. ET hour of Today on January 30 that while probably not intended, lumped many Southern cities together in a broad characterization of the situation. I’m particularly interested on how those comments reflect on what happened in Alabama, where I’ve lived since late 2004. I only wish I could link to a video of the segment in question – it only seems fair. I’ll just write from the heart though and see how it goes.

01272014 Area ForecastThe image to your left is representative of the graphics used by many media outlets in north central Alabama on Monday evening. As you can see, Birmingham and the majority of its surrounding area was only forecast to see a “dusting” of snow. The area that was predicted to receive the brunt of the storm was the southern portion of the state (mostly areas south of Demopolis), one that received a state of emergency declaration by Gov. Bentley earlier Monday. Most of the resources needed to tackle what would normally be a minor mess were sitting well to the south of the state’s largest city – the area that was eventually most affected. It was an area that was still expecting less than an inch as late as the 5:35 a.m. graphiccast post made to the NWS Birmingham’s page on Facebook.

Are there things that could have been handled differently? Yes. But, in our case, it was a case of Mother Nature making a last minute change and everyone being caught flat-footed. That would be what the folks at USA Today reported yesterday, about half way down the page in their wrap-up. The meteorologists at our television stations have been taking it on the chin – more than they probably should considering part their job is to predict something that isn’t always easy to understand. Among them:

Considering the circumstances, it went about as well as could be expected. Those parts of the state originally scheduled to receive snow were able to cope with the change in forecast, most notably Mobile. Those areas up here responded admirably considering the circumstances, demonstrating what Birmingham News columnist John Archibald properly described a chance to “marvel at the human spirit.” It’s something still on display today as we await the thaw.

Perhaps we’ll figure out a way to do staggered releases from school and work in the future. Maybe the opportunity to look at how sprawl played a role in the large numbers of cars stranded on interstates and highways will be taken advantage of as we recover. I live in the southeastern United States, but I specifically live in the state of Alabama. It handled it as well as it could.

I saw on your Twitter timeline that you like it when articulate points are presented. I only hope you’d consider this one as we continue through what’s already been a crazy winter across the country – the need to measure the use of words carefully and not to lump folks without recognizing the weight that comment may carry. I’d just say Georgia, and not “the South,” but that’s just me.

Anyway, have a safe trip to the Olympics, and thanks for taking my comments into consideration.

André Natta started The Terminal in 2007.

Adding fuel to Birmingham's revival

Lyric marquee litFriday night in Birmingham’s theater district was the kind of event more people will claim to have attended than were actually there in the coming years. Considering there were at least 1,000 people gathered in Birmingham’s theater district to watch the Lyric’s marquee rejoin the central business district’s landscape, it may be hard to tell those actual attendees from those who weren’t.

One statement continues to play at the end of my internal conversations about the first installment of REVIVE Birmingham, REV Birmingham’s street life project, one probably cheesy but true,“The marquee being lit for the first time will make it real.”

The five-week series is an opportunity for passersby to see what this city is becoming, filling currently vacant portions of a commercial district with retail concepts and hope. Potential investors may not get to check it out in person (though they probably should), but all the pictures shared online speak loudly and could be the necessary nudge to get those on the fence interested in becoming a part of the transformation that is Alabama’s Magic City these last three years.

Friday’s event was the end to the first of five weeks of deep urban exploration for Birmingham’s citizens – a gut check. They were asked to imagine what their city is becoming. Notice I didn’t use the word “could.” REVIVE has the biggest potential to inspire by allowing people to see it’s already happening and it can be built upon.

Third Avenue North was taken over with custom benches,  graphics filling window spaces, freshly made donuts, and t-shirts available for sale. Folks could even choose to catch a ride on a pedicab or write on a blackboard wall similar to the “Before I Die” project that’s lived across from Regions Field for the last month.

As the crowds move through the city throughout the month, a question will begin to creep into participant’s minds – “Well, what’s next?” I’d argue that what’s next is them. Some will have followed the tour to its next destination, but some will need to act on the urge to participate and move based on what they’ve seen. This time next year a return trip to the Theater District will most likely include a chance to see who moved into the Whitmire Lofts; continuing work on both the Lyric in addition to the former Parisian/Booker T. Washington building at 3rd Ave. N. and 18th Street as it’s converted into residences with retail on the ground floor; and a buzz of activity in the form of construction at the Pizitz building and the new transit hub.

This progress will be visible and tangible. Hopefully it will be a common occurrence throughout the city. Whether it does or not though depends on its citizens even more than it depends on REV.

Most of the folks I’ve seen so far while passing through would be considered the usual suspects – they believe in what’s currently happening in the city and have no problem jumping on board with the latest proposal or project. You need these people, or else there’s no one to inspire those who don’t necessarily believe yet (think of it as a sort of “preaching to the choir” at church). That said, Friday’s was the first tangible step in convincing some still on the fence about the city’s future outside of the city center. They were able to see how it played with what’s already there – and how it could make it better. It allowed them to see the building blocks and provide a frame of reference in a heavily traveled section of the region – one that will see additional transformation and construction cranes in the next 12-18 months. They needed to see the choir excited and catch their infectious belief in the future of the city.

TalktoREVIVE

I’m looking forward to seeing how neighborhoods like East Lake (this week), Five Points South, Woodlawn, and Ensley respond when REVIVE stops there in the coming weeks – particularly in how they choose to engage with the businesses and the activities presented. The residents need to be active participants, sharing what they like (or don’t like) with REV. They’ve got cards out seeking input and it’s not like you can’t reach out to them online or in person.

The city is at a tipping point – one where it can’t just point to an organization or a big box that exists elsewhere but to itself (a.k.a. its citizens) for the needed energy and action to continue. It’s not to say it’s not possible for an organization or event to spark a change, but it takes fuel to keep it going. I’m optimistic that the passion already on display will go a long way, but the furnace must continued to be stoked and more must jump hop on board. This is one time where waiting for someone else to make a move simply delays seeing our future.

Harbert Realty & the Two North Twentieth Sign – A Brief History

Stationmaster’s note: The following excerpts are from Design Review Committee columns originally published on the Magic City Post in 2012. We’ve re-posted them here to provide context for Rebecca’s July 25 Design Review Committee recap as it pertains to Harbert Realty and the sign atop Two North Twentieth. Clicking on the dates will take you to the original piece.

Design Review Committee Meeting: September 26

“The Harbert Realty representative was to speak on the status of the rooftop sign on Two North 20th. The committee was given a “heads up” on the project by a current tenant (and committee member). Apparently, the sign is in need of expensive repairs. Until the time comes to decide on the status of the sign, Harbert would like to wrap it in vinyl. The committee will make decisions and recommendations on this project once it is presented by Harbert.”

Design Review Committee Meeting: October 10

“Keith Rouss of Harbert Realty brought the company’s intentions for the existing sign at the top of Two North Twentieth to the committee. Due to the existing economic climate, it is no longer cost effective or affordable to continue maintenance on the 40-year-old sign. Harbert intends to wrap the sign in a pre-printed vinyl that would contain advertising. The committee expressed concerns that the sign would become “the world’s largest billboard” and no longer blend with the city’s skyline. The plans presented to the committee included a national advertising campaign for Pepsi, proposed by a New York advertising firm and local bottler Buffalo Rock. In addition to the billboard concerns, the committee took issue with the nature and look of the signage. Acknowledging the interim nature of this plan (the advertising contract would be for 18 months), the committee requested Harbert find another way to meet both the advertising and the design concerns. Despite Harbert’s concerns that the advertising plan would fall through, the committee tabled the discussion to the next meeting.”

Design Review Committee Meeting: October 24

“Keith Rouss of Harbert Realty returned to the committee with what he hoped would be a clearer iteration of the company’s intentions for the existing sign at the top of Two North Twentieth. With Rouss was Jimmy Lee from Buffalo Rock Company, the potential advertiser for the wrap of the electronic sign atop the building. The committee discussion revolved around the plans to wrap the sign being contradictory to current design standards. Rouss again argued that the uniqueness of the sign would preclude setting any precedents, but the committee still voted to deny the request.

The committee acknowledged the corporate citizenship of both Harbert Realty and Buffalo Rock Company, but despite its status as a “legal, non-conforming sign” the wrap still constitutes a billboard rather than something more akin to an artwork. In an interesting twist, a potential protestor to the wrapped sign idea attended the meeting. His concern was that this would open the opportunity to put billboard-style signs on every building in the city’s skyline, thus ruining it. Since the committee denied the request, the protestor had no need to provide comment.”

Design Review Committee Meeting: November 14

“Tab Bisignani of Harbert Realty returned to the committee with yet another iteration of the company’s intentions for the existing sign at the top of Two North Twentieth. The new proposal was of a blue sky with the word “Pepsi” formed by clouds and the Pepsi logo. Once again the committee denied the request with the explanation that the wrap still constitutes a billboard rather than something more akin to a work of art. It is interesting that most people who attended the committee meetings for each of the Harbert presentations seem to understand that the committee is asking for art and an acknowledgement of the history of Buffalo Rock and the city. Yet Harbert continues to present advertising (and continues to get denied). A simple solution thrown around after one of the meetings included running an art contest that includes a sponsorship logo – two birds with one stone, so to speak. The most uncomfortable thing about this recent presentation was the attitude of the Harbert representative. While his, and Harbert’s, frustration is understandable, Harbert has the opportunity to communicate more with the city and the committee to make this something meaningful to everyone – since it is everyone in the region who will see it at one time or another. However, whether or not he meant it this way, Bisignani’s implied threats to go to the city or another higher authority over this issue and throwing around the “weight” of the money Harbert provides to the city’s tax base are not displaying a positive image of Harbert’s corporate citizenship. At this meeting, Bisignani acted more like a corporate bully.”

More things to think about regardless of the I-20/59 conclusion

parkingunder2059Yesterday I decided to point to a specific city that’s actually tackled an inner-city interstate replacement and use it to ask a lot of questions about our situation here in Birmingham. I think talking through the answers will go a long way towards how ALDOT chooses to respond to critics of their current alternative to their original proposal to replace the existing decking as it exists.

Now, I drive by the BJCC and Uptown every day. As a result, I’ve had several other questions on my mind in recent weeks as it relates to I-20/59 and ALDOT’s proposed changes. I’m sure someone’s going to get to these at some point, but I wanted to go ahead and get these thoughts out there too just to see what bubbles up from readers:

Where do the cars currently parking under the interstate go? A lot of cars will be looking for new places to park as a result of the currently proposed configuration and the closing of 9th Ave. N. A survey of spaces located between 18th and 23rd Sts. N. underneath the interstate and along 9th suggests at least 625 (and as many as 660) vehicles will need to figure out where to go (special thanks to the RPCGB for helping to gather this info so quickly) once this project begins to move forward. This, provided new development continues to occur adjacent to the BJCC begs a follow-up question:

Where do we build a new parking lot (or do we even need to build a new one)? Before we jump on the “we need to build a new deck” bandwagon, it may help to pause and look at the bigger picture. This may be the spark needed to implement an expanded shuttle service downtown. It may even encourage folks to use the existing service provided by the BJCTA. The idea of enabling commuters and visitors to park in one of the lots located along Morris Avenue or any of the existing parking decks maintained by the Birmingham Parking Authority is intriguing. On-street parking options are plentiful, but not sufficient for those visiting the museum or the BJCC and unable to check their meters continuously throughout the day. A shuttle only works is if you can get folks out of their current need of having to park as close to their location as possible. It’s something possible to accomplish if you made it a more logical (read – cheaper) option to park in the decks than on the streets (the way many cities approach managing their parking situations to free up on-street spaces for shorter visits to stores).

Is it time for directional signage citywide? We seem to like tackling the creation of gateways for the city; the recent tree planting at the 31st St. N. exit suggests the corporate community is willing to help the city put its best foot forward as we see increased visitors not just this year, but arguably over the next five as we continue to commemorate milestones in the civil rights movement. Wayfinding, however, has been an issue the powers that be have been discussing for a long time. The Medical District is the most recent section of Birmingham to attempt to tackle it. Individual sites and attractions have tried as well as they tire of waiting for a comprehensive solution to surface.

If we accept that the ramps will go away regardless of what happens, we can also admit it will provide an excuse for visitors and locals alike to explore not just greater downtown, but the entire city (if only because it’s now a possible “accident” waiting to happen). It’s a chance to make sure all are aware of the options and experiences available to them. It could also make it easier for folks to navigate an already insane grid system.

Speaking of the grid…

Is it time to wave “bye-bye!” to the one-way streets downtown? One of the reasons often given for the existence of one-way streets in Birmingham’s city center is because of the ability to get into and out of downtown as quickly as possible via the surrounding highways. The elimination of the ramps providing access to these thoroughfares could be the impetus to finally carry out a major recommendation of the 2004 City Center Master Plan – converting many one-way streets back to two-way. It’d probably be most helpful along those streets most affected by the proposed interstate changes – thoroughfares like 5th Ave. N., 18th St., 22nd St. and Richard Arrington, Jr. Blvd. As many hope to see more restaurants and stores move downtown to serve the estimated 80,000+ that venture in every day, it sure would be nice to make them more visible from multiple directions. It could even encourage more foot traffic – thanks to increased “eyes on the road” for peace of mind.

These are questions not necessarily considered when looking at the situation on its surface, but they will be ones where answers are more critical to the period of during and after construction of whatever happens. Ironically, the very thing the proposal aims to get to pass through the city quickly – the car – is the one thing that will lead to significant decisions to be made about how downtown will continue to adapt and change as it enjoys a national and international close-up.