HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/11/2000, 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLACING PRIVATELY FUNDED ART ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY council Mw�*°��
11 -A] ac En as izEpont 1�N 2
CITY OF SAN LUIS 0 B I S P 0
FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer )
Prepared By: Wendy George, Assistant to the City Administrative Officer Wyr
SUBJECT: PROCEDURES FOR PLACING PRIVATELY FUNDED ARTON
CITY-OWNED PROPERTY
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve proposed procedures for placing privately-funded art on City-owned property
and direct staff to include them in the City's Public Art in San Luis Obispo Policies and
Procedures.
2. Authorize staff to make minor changes to these procedures, along with other procedures
currently incorporated in the City's Public Art in San Luis Obispo Policies and
Procedures, as needed in the future to improve the public art process.
3. Approve a resolution adopting new Guidelines for Public Art, replacing those approved
by Resolution No. 6811 (1990 Series), A Visual Arts in Public Places Program, Exhibit
A, Section IL
DISCUSSION
Background
In the spring of 1999, the City's Public Art Coordinator was approached by two local artists with
a proposal to place mosaics on the retaining walls of San Luis Creek in Mission Plaza. There
was no City funding available for such a proposal, but the artists had met with the Downtown
Association, which agreed to set up a memorial donation program to fund the project. It soon
became clear that the City's existing Public Art in San Luis Obispo Policies and Procedures had
no provisions for dealing with a request to place privately-funded public art on City property.
The artists spent a great amount of time with various City departments to determine the viability
of their proposal in terms of various outside agency permitting requirements, and with the
Downtown Association working on the funding program. Unfortunately, the proposal was
ultimately turned down by the Council as being inappropriate for the suggested location.
As a result, at that same council meeting, the Council directed staff to form a task force and
develop procedures to prevent similar regrettable situations from occurring again. Council's and
staff's concept at that time was for the task force to develop pre-established City locations that
were appropriate for public art and could be made available to private parties wishing to donate
art.
2-1
Council Agenda Report—Privately Funded Art in Public Places
Page 2
Task Force Meetings
The task force consisted of Gary Clay (Parks and Recreation Commission), Ann Ream (San Luis
Obispo County Arts Council), Chuck Stevenson (Architectural Review Commission), Linnea
Phillips (Community Member), Pierre Rademaker (Community Member), Lynn James
(Downtown Association), Lynne Landwehr ( Historical Museum) and Karen Kile (San Luis
Obispo Art Center). The first several meetings were spent debating the viability of the
committee's original charge to designate specific potential locations for future public art. While
at first this task had seemed like a logical place to begin, upon further discussion the committee
concluded that the tremendous potential variety of public art made it impossible to do. While
any given location might be appropriate for one kind of artwork, it might be inappropriate for
another, and vice versa.
Once the committee made this determination, it moved in another direction. Instead of trying to
determine locations, it focused on developing rigorous but "generic" guidelines for determining
whether or not a particular location would be appropriate for artwork when such a proposal is
made. The City already had criteria in place for evaluating public art, but the task force felt those
criteria dealt too much with the quality of the artwork, and did not fully address the issue of the
appropriateness of the artwork to the selected location. Much of the committee's initial energy
was directed toward the issue of placing public art in "sensitive places" such as Mission Plaza. It
questioned whether the same guidelines should be used for Mission Plaza as for other City-
owned locations. The task force also began to develop an approval process to be followed when
the City is considering allowing privately-funded art on its property.
The final products of the committee were Procedures for Privately Funded Art in Public Places
(Attachment 1) and Guidelines for Public Art (Exhibit A, Attachment 2). The committee's
intentions were that the procedures and guidelines be incorporated into the current Public Art in
San Luis Obispo Policies and Procedures approved by the Council in 1990.
Procedures for Privately Funded Art in Public Places
There are several significant aspects of the procedures that should be noted.
1. - If the City receives a request from an artist or patron to.place privately-funded art on City-
owned property, it is not necessary for the City to solicit proposals from other artists or
patrons for that location. The committee felt strongly that it would penalize the initiative
of the private contributor by doing so.
2. The City would establish a standing resource pool of 20-25 members of the public,
reflecting a variety of backgrounds, who would agree to serve when needed on a five or
six member jury to evaluate the private donor's proposal. The jury would also include
members of City advisory groups, such as the Cultural Heritage Committee or Parks and
Recreation Committee, if appropriate. The Guidelines for Public Art would be used to
evaluate the proposal. The use of a jury is consistent with the City's current practice for
selecting public art for its own capital projects.
2-2
Council Agenda Report—Privately Funded Art in Public Places
Page 3
3. If the art proposal is to be located in a "sensitive place" like Mission Plaza, it must be
given the closest possible scrutiny. If the jury is not "enthusiastically unanimous" in its
support for the project, the project should not proceed. The committee felt strongly that
the potential for public art in Mission Plaza should not be prohibited, but it should be
allowed only after very careful consideration. It also included a provision in the
procedures that the jury for such projects include a member of the Historical Society and
the Cultural Heritage Committee.
4. Once the jury approves the art proposal, it will be reviewed by appropriate City staff,
including the Risk Manager and the Public Works Director. Should the jury deny the
project, the denial may be appealed to the Council.
5. The Architectural Review Committee will then review the proposal before it goes to the
Council for final approval.
Guidelines for Public Art
The Guidelines for Public Art developed by the task force incorporate the existing guidelines, but
add language which more clearly addresses the relationship of the proposed artwork to the
proposed location. Those sections shown in italics on Attachment 2, Exhibit A, are additions to
the current guidelines. The committee felt that these new guidelines should replace the current
ones (see Attachment 3, Exhibit A, Section II) for use not only in evaluating privately-funded
public art placed on City-own property, but when evaluating any public art, regardless of the
funding source or location. Specifically, the new guidelines address:
1. the artistic quality of the work.
2. standards for interior placement of public art.
3. adding the historic, social and cultural characteristics, as well as the geographical and
environmental context, as factors to be considered when evaluating the compatibility of
the artwork with the location.
4. requiring the closest scrutiny of the proposed placement of public art in historically
sensitive locations such as Mission Plaza.
5. consideration of potential conflicts with present or future vegetation or construction near
the proposed location.
6. consideration of public safety or public health concerns that might be created by the
artwork or the location.
7. insuring that the artwork is securely installed.
2-3
Council Agenda Report—Privately Funded Art in Public Places
Page 4
Staff Recommendation
The committee recognized that its approach of establishing new guidelines and procedures for
the placement of privately funded art on City-owned property differed from the Council's initial
concept of designating specific locations for public art. However, it felt very strongly that pre-
selecting locations was far too limiting and would ultimately have a negative effect on the City's
public art program. After listening to the very well-considered deliberations of the committee,
staff concurs with its conclusion and recommends approving the proposed procedures for
Privately Funded Art in Public Places and the revised Guidelines for Public Art.
Flexibility in Changing Public Art Procedures
In 1990, the Council adopted, by resolution, a Visual Art in Public Places Program. Included in
that program were a set of goals and objectives; the establishment of the 1% public art
contribution standard for City capital projects; criteria for evaluating public art; and the
establishment of a review requirement by the Architectural Review Commission and the City
Council. With approval of the program, the Council also approved a recommendation that
administrative procedures be developed for implementing the program. Those procedures were
finalized in 1991 and adopted by the City Council. In the intervening years, the procedures have
evolved administratively, requiring some adjustments. Staff is requesting the Council's
permission to make future non-substantive changes to the procedures, including the new section
on Privately Funded Art in Public Places, at an administrative level. However, any changes to
the adopted Visual Arts in Public Places Program, itself, or significant alterations to the
procedures, such as adding a whole new section like Privately Funded Art in Public Places,
would return to the Council for formal approval.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to approving the proposed procedures and guidelines.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Council could add additional considerations to the guidelines or delete some of those
proposed. The committee devoted six long meetings to developing them, but it is
possible that improvements could still be made.
2. Council could direct staff to return to the original concept of specifically designating
locations for public art. While this approach could be very restrictive to the public art
program, it has the advantage of being much easier to administer in the future.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Procedures for Privately-Funded Art in Public Places
2. Resolution adopting new Guidelines for Public Art
3. Resolution No. 6811 (1990 Series) A visual Arts in Public Places Program
2-4
PRIVATELY FUNDED ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
An important source of public art is that which is privately funded, but located in a public
place. Usually, such works are commissioned by an individual, a group of individuals, a
non-profit organization or a business or corporation. For some personal reason, the
patron wishes to offer the City a piece of artwork, often as a memorial to a person or
event. Sometimes the patron can even be an artist who wishes to offer additional
enhancement to the community and is able to find financial backers to support his or her
endeavor. Whatever may be the reason for the offer of public art to be placed on City
property, the offer will trigger the following process.
I. Submittal of a Proposal
1. All proposals for privately funded public art placed on City property shall be
submitted to the City's Public Art Coordinator on the appropriate form.
(Exhibit ). The form must be accompanied by drawings, models, photographs
or any other graphic depiction which will help more clearly define the artwork.
2. When a proposal is submitted, whether by a patron or by an artist, it is not
necessary for the City to solicit additional competitive proposals for the same
location from other artists.
II. Evaluation of a Proposal
1. Once the proposal is received by the Public Art Coordinator, he or she shall call
together a jury from a standing pool of resource individuals to judge the merits of
the proposal.
a. The resource pool shall be made up of 20-25 members who are reflective of
various artistic disciplines, and shall also include profit/non-profit business
people, educators, historians and individuals with engineering, architecture
and construction backgrounds.
b. The San Luis Obispo County Arts Council shall be responsible for providing
assistance in locating volunteers from the artistic disciplines to help create the
pool.
2. The jury shall consist of five to six individuals whose background and interest are
appropriate to the type of artwork being proposed.
a. If the artwork is to be placed in a public park, a representative of the Parks and
Recreation Commission shall be included on the jury.
1 2-5
aTsaCHNIFENT i
b. If the artwork is to be placed in a location of historical significance, a member
of the Historical Society or another historian and a member of the Cultural
Heritage Committee shall be included on the jury.
3. The jury will apply the standard criteria for public art (Exhibit ) in
making a determination that the proposed project is acceptable to the City and
should move forward in the approval process.
4. Projects proposed for areas of high historical sensitivity, such as Mission Plaza
and the walls of Mission Creek, should be given the closest possible scrutiny to
determine if the project would be an enhancement to the area. In cases where the
jury is not enthusiastically unanimous in its support of a project for such a
sensitive location, the project should not proceed.
5. If the jury rejects a proposal, the patron shall have the right to appeal this decision
to the City Council in accordance with the appeals procedures in Section 1.20.020
of the Municipal Code.
III. Approval of a Proposal
Once a privately funded project is recommended for placement on City-owned property,
it needs to be reviewed by the following departments and City advisory bodies. The
City's Public Art Coordinator will act as the project manager for all such projects and is
responsible for "shepherding" them through the necessary approval stages.
1. The Public Works Director or his designee(s) shall review the proposal to insure:
• that the artwork's placement will not create undue difficulties for maintenance
of the surrounding area.
• that the proposed materials are durable and will not create significant
maintenance problems for the artwork itself.
• that any engineering or structural concerns are addressed
2. The Risk Manager shall review the proposal to assess whether or not it provides
undue risks or safety issues.
3. The Architectural Review Commission shall review the proposal to assure that it
meets the adopted criteria for public art.
4. Ultimately, the City Council shall provide final approval of the proposal.
5. In some cases, proposals may take additional review because of their nature or
location.
2 2-6
Al JL
• If the project is to be placed in an historically sensitive location, the Cultural
Heritage Committee shall review and approve the project.
• If the project is to. be placed in a City park, the Parks and Recreation
Commission shall review and approve the project.
6. The Public Arts Coordinator shall also review the proposed project to assure that
it complies with the City's Donation Acceptance Policy. (Exhibit ).
IV. Issuing of Permit
1. Once a project is conceptually approved by the City Council, the patron will be
directed to prepare plans and specifications for the artwork.
2. Plans and specifications for public art projects will require much of the same
information as other new developments. Depending on the specific type of art,
the following information is typical:
• Site Plan
• Grading Plan
• Elevation/section drawings
• Design, attachment and/or fabrication details
• Structural calculations
• Material and performance specifications
• Maintenance program
3. Once plans and specifications are developed, the project must go through the
regular building approval process, which includes applying for and receiving a
building permit and final inspection approval.
V. Labeling of Artwork
1. In order to avoid the use of donated public art for advertising purposes, a standard
plaque, approved by the City Council, shall be used for all labeling.
a. The plaque shall contain room for:
• patron's name
• artist's name
• title of artwork
• date of completion
• material(s)used
• short explanation of work(optional)
• number designation
3 2-7
1^11 Iri1rfl('ti.:f'v l S
b. If an artist wishes to deviate from the standard plaque, an appeal may be made
to the City Administrative Officer (CAO) or his designee within 10 days.
Should the CAO uphold the denial, the patron may appeal this decision to the
City Council in accordance with the appeals procedures in Section 1.20.020 of
the Municipal Code.
VI. Final Acceptance
1. All donated projects on public property must have final inspection approval by the
City's Building Division and by the Public Art Coordinator.
2. Before accepting the project, the Public Art Coordinator shall provide the Public
Works Department a complete set of plans, specifications, attachments,
fabrication details and a copy of the City's Public Art Maintenance Record
(Exhibit ).
4 2-8
ATTIACH::'" :NT 2
RESOLUTION NO. (2000 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADOPTING NEW GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC ART
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo adopted a Visual Arts in Public
Places Program in 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Visual Arts in Public Places Program included guidelines for evaluating
public art; and
WHEREAS, a community task force appointed by the City has recommended that the
guidelines need to be more rigorous.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. New Guidelines for Public Art, as shown in Exhibit A, be adopted.
SECTION 2. The Guidelines for Public Art adopted as part of Resolution No. 6811
(1990 Series)be rescinded.
Upon motion of , seconded by ,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of , 2000.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
*r -
g en, ty Attorney
2-9
EXH181 i A
GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC ART
1. Public artwork shall be of high artistic quality.
2. Public art shall be located within the public right-of-way, or shall otherwise be
easily visible or accessible from a public right-of-way
3. Interior locations for public art shall be freely open and accessible to the public.
4. Public art shall be compatible with the immediate site and neighborhood in terms of
historic, social and cultural characteristics, architectural scale, materials, land use,
and geographical and environmental context.
5. Public art proposed for areas of high historical sensitivity, such as Mission Plaza
and its creek, should be given the closest scrutiny, including input from the
Historical Society, before approval by the jury.
6. Public art shall be integrated with the site, and include landscaping, lighting,
interpretive information and other amenities where appropriate.
7. Consideration.shall be given to potential conflicts with present or future vegetation
or construction.
8. The design and placement of public art shall not impede pedestrian or vehicle
traffic, or conflict with public or private easements.
9. Consideration shall be given to any public safety or public health concerns created
by the artwork.
10. Permanent public art shall be constructed of durable, high-quality materials and
require minimal or no maintenance. Temporary public art shall be constructed of
materials appropriate to its duration of public display.
11. Public art shall be securely installed.
12. A wide variety of artistic expression is encouraged. However, expressions of
profanity, vulgarity or obvious poor taste are inappropriate.
5 2-10
T - ATT;G � i 3
RESOLUTION NO. 6811 (1990 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADOPTING A VISUAL ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Title and Content. The City Council hereby adopts the "Visual Arts
in Public Places" program as described in Exhibits "A" and 'B" of the Community -
Development Department staff report dated May 1, 1990.
SECTION 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this resolution, the following terms
are defined as follows:
(1) "Visual Art in Public Places" or "Public Art" means any visual work of art
displayed in a publically visible location: (a) in a City-owned area, (b) on the
exterior of any city-owned facility, (c) within any city-owned facility in areas
designated as public area, lobbies, or public assembly areas, or (d) on non-city-
owned property if the work of art is installed or financed, either wholly or in part,
with city funds or grants procured by the City; and if on private property, secured
by a public art agreement between the City and the landowner.
(2) "Work of Art" includes, but is not limited to,sculpture,monument,mural, fresco,
bas-relief; mobiles, photography, drawing, handcrafts, painting, fountain, landscape
composition, banners, mosaic, ceramic, weaving, carving, and stained glass. "Work
of art' is the creative result of individual or group effort, and is either unique or of
limited-issue nature, and is normally not mass-produced or intended primarily for
a commercial market. "Work of art" does not normally include landscaping, paving,
architectural ornamentation, or signs as defined by Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal
Code.
(3) "Capital Construction Project" means any project listed in the City's Financial
Plan Capital Improvement Program, and paid for wholly or in part by the City of San
Luis Obispo for public benefit. "Capital construction project" includes, but is not
limited to building construction, addition, and remodel; parks; plazas; creek
improvements and flood protection projects; bridges; streets, sidewalks, bikeways,
trails other public transportation improvements;parking facilities, and similar public
facilities as determined by the Community Development Director.
(4) "Construction Cost" means the cost in dollars, as approved by the City Council
or the City Administrative Officer, to construct a project. "Construction Cost" shall
not include land acquisition, design, operation, or maintenance costs.
2-11
R 6811
ATI
Resolution No. 6811 0990 Series)
Page 2
(5) "Eligible Project" means a capital construction project which is not exempt under
the provisions of this resolution, or by City Council or City Administrative Officer
action.
SECTION 3. Environmental Determination. After City Council review and
consideration, the Community Development Director's decision to grant a negative
declaration pursuant to the City Environmental Procedures and the California
Environmental Quality Act is hereby affirmed.
SECTION 4. Percent For Art. One percent (1%) of the total approved construction
cost of eligible capital construction projects shall be expended for the design and
installation of public art.
SECTION S. Responsibility For Implementation. The Community Development
Director is responsible for administering the program. City departments responsible for the
planning, design, and construction of eligible capital construction projects shall include
public art in their projects, or shall otherwise meet the requirement through allocation of
funds to the Public Art Program as described in Section 6.
SECTION 6. Public Art Program. (1) Small capital construction projects,
or projects in which the City Council or City Administrative Officer determines that it is
not feasible or desirable to include public art due to site limitations or the project's location
or design, may meet this requirement through allocation of one percent (1%) of their
construction cost as an in-lieu contribution for citywide public art; (2) The Finance
Director shall establish and maintain a Public Art Program in the Capital
Improvement Plan for such a purpose; and (3) Program funds shall be used for the design,
fabrication, and installation of public art, pursuant to the Visual Arts in Public Places
Program, Exhibits "A"' and "B".
2-12
TTACKL'.s`T 3
Resolution No. 6811 0990 Series)
Page 3
SECTION 7. Exempt Projects. The following types of projects are exempt from this
percent for art requirement: (1) Utility projects, such as public water or sewer system
improvements, pumps, and wells; (2) Underground projects, such as storage tanks and
storm drains and similar items; (3) The City Council or the City Administrative Officer
may exempt other projects from this requirement upon finding that: (a) installation of
public art would be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare; (b) the project is not
suitable for the inclusion of public art; or is not visible by, used by, or accessible to
the public; or (c). The project is itself a public art project .
SECTION 8. San Luis Obispo County Arts Council. The San Luis Obispo County
Arts Council shall assist the City by evaluating the technical and artistic merit of proposed
public art projects by forwarding its comments to the Community Development Director
or Architectural Review Commission. This is recognized as an appropriate function for the
Arts Council, a non-profit agency, and no City funding is allocated for this advisory service.
SECTION 9. Program Evaluation. The City Clerk shall schedule the public art
program for Council review within one year of the date of this resolution. At such review,
the Council may modify or suspend the program.
On motion of Councilman Roalman , seconded by
Councilwoman Pinard , and on the following
roll call vote:
AYES: Coumcilmembers Roalman, Pinard, Rappa, Reiss, and Aiayor Dunin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
2-13
ATT ACH:vi .i�"T 3
Resolution No. 68110990 Series)
Page 4
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 15th day of
May , 1990.
Mayor Ron Dunin
ATTEST:
ity er voges
. • i i t i • t C i • t R
ity Administ tive O ficer
Ytorn
Tepartment Community Developme
Public.Wo s epar went
2-14
r
Resolution No.6811 (1990 Series)
Page 5
FifeaDepartment
61s4,a ;e:cireati14on Department
Finan Director
i
D/jh/pub-art5.wp
2-15
�IIIIIIIIIII►����IIIIIIIIIIII�IIII�� CI W of
San WIS OBISPO
VISUAL ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM
I. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A. Goals
The City of San Luis Obispo Shall:
1. Preserve and enrich the community's environmental quality by encouraging
visual arts in public places for both public and private development.
2. Foster public art to enhance San Luis Obispo's character.
3. Promote opportunities for public participation in and interaction with public
artworks and artists.
4. Expand access to the arts for residents and visitors, with special attention to
the needs of under-served audiences, such as children, low-income families,
senior citizens, and disabled persons.
5. Support a diversity of public art styles, media, programs, and artists through
its matching grants program for public art.
6. Encourage public artworks which celebrate and reaffirm the community's
historical, socio-cultural, and aesthetic values, and which provide a sense of
continuity for future generations.
7. Expand citizen awareness and appreciation of the visual arts as a key part of
the community's identity and quality of life.
B. Objectives
To achieve these goals, the city will:
1. Strongly encourage the inclusion of visual arts in new public and private
development projects in the PF, O, C-C, C-R and C-T zones through its
development review process.
2 Evaluate, and where appropriate, revise its General. Plan, Zoning and
Subdivision Regulations and other-pertinent.policies'andstandards to provide
incentives for and removeobstacles to public art.. _
. . .: wl;:
� /11 {AI CH'Y,^Es.: 1 3 w.M
Visual Arts in Public Places Program
Page 2
3. Develop and implement, in conjunction with San Luis Obispo County Arts
Council, administrative policies for public art acquisition, administration,
funding and long-range planning.
4. Expand the range and depth of financial support sources for the visual arts,
including the possibility of using a portion of an increase in transient
occupancy tax or sales tax to support "public arts programs".
5. Include funding for public art planning and development in the city's Capital
Improvement and Capital Reinvestment Programs where feasible, including
an on-going matching grant fund for public art.
6. Include public art in new capital projects such as parks, city buildings, public
plazas and major street projects; and allocate at least 1 percent of total capital
construction costs for the installation of public art.
II. GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC ART
Art eludes precise definition or regulation. Art in public context, unlike art in private
collections or museums, is linked to the community in complex ways. It both shapes and
reflects the community's perception of itself — its character and its values. And it must
address and respond to a wider audience than art in museums or private collections.
Recognizing this difference, cities and counties have developed various guidelines to
encourage the widest possible range of artistic expression, while ensuring that artworks
express the community character and values, and meet reasonable criteria applicable to
other types of"development projects".
The following guidelines will help artists, citizens, commission and council members and
staff understand the city's expectations for public art. They are .not intended to unduly
restrict creative expression, or limit the types of public art possible. Rather, they are
intended to achieve the best possible mating of site and artwork, and guide what is
essentially a form of.communication between the artist and the community. They are
interpreted by the City Council and the Architectural Review Commission, with technical
and procedural assistance from the San Luis Obispo County Arts Council.
1. Public art shall be located within the public right-of-way, or shall otherwise
be easily visible or accessible from a public right-of-way.
2. The design and placement of public art shall not impede pedestrian or vehicle
traffic, or conflict with public or private easements.
3. Public art shall be compatible with,the immediate site and neighborhood in
terms.of architectural scale, materials, land use and the site's historical and
environmental context.
...
Visual Arts in Public Places Program
Page 3
4. Public art shall be integrated with the site, and include landscaping, lighting,
interpretive information, and other amenities where appropriate.
5. Permanent public art shall be constructed of durable, high-quality materials
and require minimal or no maintenance. Temporary public art shall be
constructed of materials appropriate to its duration of public display.
6. A wide variety of artistic expression is encouraged. Expressions of profanity,
vulgarity, or obvious poor taste are inappropriate.
7. Artwork shall reflect a high level of artistic excellence.
S. Public art shall not directly or indirectly cause adverse environmental effects,
or otherwise jeopardize public health, safety or welfare.
III. CRITERIA FOR MATCHING GRANT FUNDING
The city has established a matching grant fund to encourage public art. For every dollar
of private investment, the City Council may match the expenditure on a dollar-for-dollar
basis. Public art projects receiving matching funds should provide a clear public benefit and
advance the city's public art goals.' To achieve this, the city has developed special review
criteria.
Projects seeking matching grant funds will require City Council approval, as described in
Section IV below. The council will use the following criteria in evaluating funding requests:
L Artwork shall be located 1) on publicly owned property or right-of-way, or 2) on
private property if the artwork is secured through a public art easement.
2. Artwork should promote the city's Goals and Objectives for Public Art
3. The applicant has demonstrated sufficient experience and ability to successfully
complete the public art project
4. Projects which make creative and efficient use of resources will be given preference.
l
S. Artwork shall be consistent with the city's Public Art Guidelines.
6. Artwork designed and/or sponsored by a San Luis Obispo county resident, business
or organization will be given preference.
7. The City shall be named as an additional insured and indemnified during
construction and installation of the public artwork
_ 8. Permanent artwork receiving city funds shall become City property.
: ::
Visual Arts in Public Places Program
Page 4
IV. PUBLIC ART REVIEW PROCESS
Public art projects shall be reviewed according to the chart shown in Exhibit "B". All public
art shall require review and approval by the City's Architectural Review Commission,except
for those public art projects determined by the Community Development Director to be
minor or incidental. Hearing, notice and appeal procedures shall be as provided for
architectural review, Chapter 248 of the Municipal Code. Public an in major City capital
projects, or public art projects for which matching city funds are requested, shall require
City Council approval. The San Luis Obispo County Arts Council will assist the City in the
review of public art. A subcommittee of the Arts Council will, on request by the City,
evaluate artworks on their technical and artistic merits, and make recommendations to the
Architectural Review Commission and City Council.
V. INCENTIVES FOR PUBLIC ART
To promote the inclusion of public art in both public and private projects, the City shall
undertake, as appropriate, the following actions to implement the Visual Arts in Public
Places program:
1. Waive processing and permit fees for public art projects.
2. Increase matching grant funding or allow unused grant funds to accrue from
one budget cycle to the next.
3. Consider allowing density bonuses or height exceptions to projects which
include public.art tied to open space at ground.level. For example, a project
Which included sculpture and mini-plaza might receive height or coverage
exception to allow additional floor area comparable to the area devoted to
public art.
4. Work with the county and state to explore possible tax incentives for public
art.
S. Revise setback regulations (Section 17.16.020) to allow public art within
setback areas, with provision allowing direction discretion to require use
permits for large artworks, or for those whose placement 1may have solar,
traffic or environmental impacts.
6. Clarify Sign Regulations relative to public art.
7. Minimize public review time by waiving construction permit requirements,
where allowed by law, for most types of public art, including.. temporary
artworks, projects which do not involve significant structural work, and
projects which do not affect public health or safety.(c.&, tile
e mural or bas-
relief on exiswall);and by allowing.over-the-counter.constructioa permits .
ATI .�. rte:.ins
Visual Arts in Public Places Program
Page 5
for all but structurally complex artworks.
8. Consider allowing public art to meet a portion of the total required common
open space in condominium projects.
9. Redefine "structure" in the Zoning Regulations (Section 17.04.410) so that
public artworks are excluded for determining setbacks or building/lot
coverage.
VI. ADDITIONAL TASKS
These are additional tasks to be completed as part of a comprehensive public art program,
listed in the recommended order of implementation:
1. Establish Administrative Procedures - In addition to public art policies
established by the City Council, administrative procedures are needed to
support the overall goals of the program. These would include: artist
selection procedures, community involvement, interagency cooperation,
contract preparation, art .collection management guidelines, insurance and
liability, and conflict resolution.
2. Artist Involvement -The ARC is the primary City advisory body charged with
reviewing public art. To assist the ARC in its role, at least one member of
the commission should be an artist, or have a strong background in the visual
arts. This would help commissioners understand art issues, and provide the
technical expertise to understand public art media, techniques,.and design
implementation.
3. Public Art Brochure - To assist community groups, developers, and citizens,
the City will prepare a brochure which explains the public art program: goals
and objectives, matching grant funding, and the design review process. The
brochure would be made available through the Arts Council, and at the City
Community Development and Engineering Departments.
4. Education Program - The success of public art is measured largely by the
community's understanding of an and appreciation for this art form as a
cultural resource. To promote such understanding, the City will help sponsor
an educational program which may include: public art activities in elementary
school classes, occasional articles on public art in the SLO Newsletter, San
Luis Obispo City/County Library displays,and promotion of public art among
civic organizations.
5. Program Evaluation - The public art program should be evaluated on a
regular basis, initially one year after adoption (on or before May 15, 1991),
and then every 2 years, in conjunction with the city's budget cycle. The
written evaluation would describe the status of public art projects, evaluate
policies and.procedures,-and suggest.chaages,to.the program,-as appropriate
PUBLIC ART REVIEW PROCESS
LEGEND
SUBMIT
APPLICATION NORMAL REVIEW
- SPECIAL REVIEW
w * PUBLIC HEARING
IF MINOR OR TEMPORARY ARTWORK STAFF
f--------- EVALUATION
I
I NOT MINOR OR
TEMPORARY
MINOR OR
INCIDENTALIF INCITY PAW ROUTING
- IF MATCHING GRANT FUNDING REQUESTED
H.R
ARCEVIEW
I I
� I I
MAJOR CITY-FUNDED
I PARKS& ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS OR PROMOTIONAL
RECREATION IF APPEALED
I - REVIEW - - COORDINATING
I COMMITTEE COMMISSION COMMITTEE
I I
L--------- PERMIT CITY
COUNCIL
INSTALL ARTWORK
MEETING AGENDA
�������IQIIIIIII��PI9���lU ATE -�I-�� ITEM # a-
counat mcmoRan6um
Icrty of 5x111 Lui! om1 o, 3 faittiftRat O .8 . 12]117E"M 77 -
DATE: July 11, 2000
TO: City Council Members
VIA: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer
FROM: Wendy George, Assistant to the CAO ''
SUBJECT: Council Member Romero's Suggested Changes to the Procedures for
Privately Funded Art in Public Places
At his request, staff met with Council Members Romero, who proposed some changes to the
procedures for Privately Funded Art in Public Places (agenda item #2, pages 2-6 through 2-
8). The suggested changes are not substantive, but will help to make the procedures more
accurate and effective. The proposed changes are as follows:
1. II. Evaluation of a Proposal — Step 4 will be changed to say that if the jury cannot
unanimously support the placement of art in an area of high historical sensitivity, it will
recommend that the project not proceed. Currently the word "recommend" is not used.
Step 5 will include a sentence that says the.reasons for the jury's recommendation to
reject the proposal will be forward to the Council should its decision be appealed.
2. III. Approval of a Proposal — The order of approval will be changed so that the first
step will be review by the Public Art Coordinator to assure compliance with the City's
Donation Acceptance Policy (currently step 6). The next steps will be as listed (1 — 3).
Current step 5 will be inserted next, with Council approval listed as the last step. The
numbering will be corrected as appropriated.
3. V. Labeling of Artwork — Section 1 (a) will be changed to read "The plaque shall
contain:" with the words "room for' deleted.
RECEIVED
[GF'CLERKIORIG
UNCIL DD DIR
O ❑FIN DIR J U L 1 12000
0 ❑FIRE CHIEF
roRNEY 0 P DIR SLO CITY CLERK
❑POLICE CF,F T TEAM ❑REC DIR
❑UTIL DIR
nhune
11 PERS DIR
�7P_OrtY�
11
Council Memo 7-11-00