Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/2010, B2 - APPROVAL OF PUBLIC ART FOR THE PORTOLA FOUNTAIN council un_e_l9,_to_IC j acjcnda Report g� CITY O F SAN LU IS OBIS PO FROM: Betsy Kiser, Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared By: Shannon Bates, Public Art Coordinator SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PUBLIC ART FOR THE PORTOLA FOUNTAIN RECOMMENDATION 1. As recommended by the Public Art Jury and the Architectural Review Commission (ARC), approve the public art piece entitled QUISHI / SHOUSHI for the Portola Fountain at the intersection of Marsh and Higuera streets. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the artist for $125,000 for completion of the project. DISCUSSION Background In August of 1967, the San Luis Obispo Monday Club (a non-profit civic organization with a long history of community service) began discussions regarding the club's participation in a City beautification project and in October 1967 the club agreed to spearhead the project to create a fountain at the entrance to the City (Marsh and Higuera Streets intersection). The fountain later became the Monday Club's civic project for the year. With $900, preliminary plans, some donated plants and lots of donated labor (over 200 off-duty hours donated by City of SLO firefighters), the Monday Club, in collaboration with the City of San Luis Obispo successfully completed the fountain beautification project for this major City gateway. While appropriate at the time, the fountain has since become dated in design and minimized by the amount of activity surrounding it, making it a prime candidate and location for a substantial piece of public art. As such, it was first identified for the City's public art program in 2003-05 Financial Plan and allocated $40,000. It soon became apparent that additional funding was needed in order to acquire an art piece that was adequate for the site (as well as continuing to function as a water feature). As part of the 2007-09 Financial Plan, Council approved specific projects for public art funding and one of these projects was to increase the funding for the Portola Fountain public art project. An additional $90,000 was allocated bringing the total available for this project to $130,000. In October, 2008 a request for qualifications (RFQ) was released, resulting in the selection of a piece of artwork by a public art jury Public Art Jury Review One hundred fifty-three (153) artists responded to the RFQ. A public art jury consisting of Thomas Brajkovich (Architect), Jed Joyce (Artist), Ali Semon (Frame Works), Jack Beisek(Arts Council member), Nancy Hillenburg (Monday Club) and John Dokulil (artist) convened on T3a-r Approval of Public Art for the Portola Fountain Page 2 several occasions to review the artists' qualifications. The jury eventually invited six artists to present a proposal in front of the jury. To evaluate each proposal the jury used the following Guidelines for Public Art (see Attachment 2 for Guidelines): 1. Artistic excellence. 2. Appropriateness of scale, form, material, content and design relative to the environment. 3. Relationship to the social, cultural and historical identity of the building. 4. Appropriateness of materials relative to structural and surface integrity, protection against theft, vandalism, public safety and weathering. 5. Ease of maintenance. 6. Appropriateness of proposed method of installation of artwork, and safety and structural factors involved in installation. After presentations by each of the artists and much discussion/deliberation; the jury unanimously selected the piece QUISHI/SHOUSHI by San Diego artist Jeffrey Laundenslager. The jury felt the piece: "made a substantial statement", "added a unique piece to the City's public art collection", and"had a broad appeal." Project Description OUISHI/SHOUSHI is a 35-foot tall kinetic sculpture that expresses simplicity, complexity and the power of nature. The movement of the wind becomes visible through the elegant motion of sculptural forms that while appearing massive, "dance" in the wind with a weightless elegance. Each of the three kinetic elements, ranging from 16 to 17 feet long, will sit on top of a dichroic glass sculpture in which the water from the fountain will undulate over, falling into the water basin below. With regard to construction materials, the sculpture will be constructed using stainless.steel and titanium as well as a kiln cast glass (dichroic glass) for the water feature. An engineered footing will anchor the piece to the inside of the existing fountain basin. Lighting will consist of LED lights inside the glass sculpture as well as lights positioned to illuminate the kinetic elements at night(see Attachment 3 for photos of proposed artwork). ARC Review On May 17, 2010, artist Jeffrey Laudenslager, presented QUISHI/SHOUSHI to the ARC for discussion and approval. Using the Guidelines for Public Art, the ARC found that the artwork meets the criteria for public art and recommended its approval to the City Council (see Attachment 4 for ARC Resolution). CONCURRENCES The Public Art Jury, and the ARC reviewed QUISHI/SHOUSHI and recommends that the piece be approved for the Portola Fountain at the intersection of Marsh and Higuera streets. 12 Bc;f— ^C -, Approval of Public Art for the Portola Fountain Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT $130,000.00 is available for this project. $125,000 has been allocated for the art piece, with the remaining funds held in reserve for finalist's stipends, the identification plaque and the dedication ceremony. The following table outlines the funding sources for the recommended project: Pro �007-09 GF Pro Ject Total Portola Fountain 1 $42,000 $40,000 $48,000 $130,000 ALTERNATIVES The Council could reject the piece and direct staff to reissue the RFQ. This is not recommended based upon the concurrences identified above. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Guidelines for Public Art 3. Photos of proposed artwork 4. ARC Resolution T:\Council Agenda Reports\Parks&Recreation CAR\Public Art\Portola Fountain CAR.doc Ca 3 AttscLmeu[ I c - C- R-S - r _ S -mu. _S I Aft VICINITY MAP APCPA111mog Marsh & Higuera St . A ;UIDELINES FOR PUBLIC ART ^' n,p„�h gI1T I,- Architectural Review Commission Criteria 1. Publicly funded public art shall be located within the public right-of-way, a public building or otherwise shall be easily visible or accessible from a public right-of-way. Interior locations for public art are permitted, and shall be freely open and accessible to the public. 2. Privately funded public art shall be located on privately owned land or buildings which are places of high visibility to the public. Such places shall be in exterior locations, and not within buildings. If privately funded public art is donated to the City, Guideline No.1 above applies to location of art. 3. Consideration shall be given to the size, massing, location and scale of the proposed piece and to potential conflicts with present or future vegetation or construction. 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 geographicaland environmental context. 5. The design and placement of public art shall not impede pedestrian or vehicle traffic, or conflict with public or private easements. 6. Consideration shall be given to any public safety or public health concerns created by the artwork. 7. Public art shall be integrated with the site and/or building, and include landscaping, lighting, interpretive information and other amenities where appropriate. 8. Public art shall be securely installed. Public Art Jury Criteria 1. Public artwork shall be original and of high artistic quality and shall not include any signage or other advertisement or logo, literal or abstract. 2. Public art should be considerate of the immediate site and neighborhood in terms of historic, social and cultural characteristics, architectural scale, materials, land use, and geographical and environmental context. 3. Public art shall be integrated with the site, and include landscaping, lighting, interpretive information and other amenities where appropriate. 4. 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. 5. A wide variety of artistic expression is encouraged. However, expressions of profanity, vulgarity or obvious poor taste are inappropriate:. Other Review Criteria 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 Cultural Heritage Committee, before approval by the jury. GAADMIN\Public Art 2\Policies&ProceduresTINAL Revised Policy and Procedures\Guidelines for Public Art Revised final draft 10808.doc B9-5 t.. � 1 a a . t- n Ile - - T'e p -"�J[ Y�i °" '� i w •-'rte It Ick c, ° mt .. a .•2•. z- y mat ... >P.C�" e•.� ,� CN6�ENT _ RESOLUTION NO. ARC-1006-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED PUBLIC ART PIECE ENTITLED "QISHI/SHOUSHI"MEETS THE CITY'S GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC ART FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MARSH & HIGUERA STREETS (ARC PA 111-09) WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on May 17, 2010, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application ARC PA 111-09, City of San Luis Obispo Parks &Recreation Department, applicant;and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made of the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. 1. The proposed artwork is consistent with the City's Guidelines for Public Art, as stated in the City's Public Art Manual, Appendix C. 2. The Art Jury approved the artwork design on February 11, 2009. 3. The public art application complies with the standards set forth in the Community Design Guidelines. 4. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review(CEQA Guidelines, Section 15311). Section 2. Action. The Commission hereby supports public art application ARC PA 111-09 allowing installation of a public art piece to be placed within the fountain of the landscaped median at the intersection of Marsh and Higuera Streets and recommends approval to the City Council, subject to the following conditions, and noting two code requirements: Conditions 1. The sculpture shall be installed in full conformance with the plans reviewed and approved by the ARC and stamped with Community Development Department approval. A building permit shall be obtained prior to installation of the sculpture. • ,,. Resolution No.ARC-1006-10 ; Ti:ACHi'- U , Page 2 2. Five sets of complete plans along with two copies of any supporting documents shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. 3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include complete structural, electrical, and plumbing plans related to the proposed development. The plans shall include existing and proposed improvements and utilities for reference. Specifications shall be provided for any proposed pumping, lighting, or other systems appurtenant to the.development of the public art piece. Said specs shall be reviewed and approved for compliance with City standards or an approved equal. Final installation details shall be included as parts of building permit plans to the review and approval of the Community Development and Public Works Directors.. 4. The submittal of working drawings shall include a structural analysis prepared by a licensed design professional to evaluate loads imposed by wind, seismic, and soil-bearing pressure. The engineer shall design structural connections and foundation systems. The existing fountain bottom is not a structural slab and should not be considered as a suitable foundation for the proposed structure. The structural analysis shall include all pertinent vertical and lateral loading in accordance with the uniform codes. The lateral analysis shall include wind and seismic forces. The wind analysis shall assume that the structure is fixed in the worst case loading position. The vertical analysis shall include an additional temporary point load on the lower section to accommodate a person(s) climbing on the art piece. 5. A no-fee encroachment permit shall be issued to the licensed contractor(s) and/or permitee responsible for the construction and construction staging within the public right-of-way. Traffic and pedestrian controls shall be provided in accordance with MUTCD and City Engineering Standards as a condition of said permit(s). Liability insurance shall be provided by the permitee with the City listed as additionally insured in accordance with City standards. 6. The art piece.shall be constructed so that the base lighting can be turned off and the art work easily converted by the artist to fixed, static positions or modified to reduce the amount of movement if traffic issues are identified. Along with plans submitted for a building permit, appropriate low-level lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments to ensure that the sculpture is properly illuminated for public viewing but that glare or light spillage is not created that might create traffic conflicts. 7. The art shall be brushed and treated to reduce glare to the satisfaction of the City. 8. The art piece shall be designed with the goal of achieving the following minimum clearances from the pedestrian path, traffic signal equipment, and roadway under all possible positions: Pedestrian Walk Way: 8' Vertical /3' Horizontal Traffic signal equipment: 5' Vertical / 5' Horizontal Roadway: 17' Vertical / 5' Horizontal n-T'P' !V'i El\T Resolution No.ARC-1006-10 Page 3 Exceptions to strict adherence to the above standards may be granted with the approval of both the Community Development Department and Public Works Department Directors based on a finding that the safety concerns with the piece can be mitigated. Techniques to help achieve the desired clearances include, but are not limited to, adjusting the walkway location, adding landscaping and modifying the slumpstone wall cap. 9. The City is responsible for providing all maintenance necessary to preserve the public art in good condition and to protect it against physical defacement, mutilation, or alteration. 10. The City of San Luis Obispo shall assume full responsibility and liability for the piece once approved, installed, and completed. 11. Include additional landscaping to soften the appearance of the slumpstone wall while retaining views of the commemorative plaque. Code Requirements 1. A soils report may be required in order to determine soil and seismic design parameters. 2. The submittal of working drawings shall include a special inspection program. Special inspections may include, but are not limited to, structural welding, soils investigatioh/inspections, and structural observations. On motion by Commissioner Wilhelm, seconded by Commissioner Ehdaie, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commrs. Wilhelm, Ehdaie, Hopkins, Weber, and.Palazzo NOES: None REFRAIN: None ABSENT: Commrs. Duffy and Wynn The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 17th day of May, 2010. Pam Ricci, S etary Architectural Review Commission -le-COUNCIL I DIR Ere *e�� 131I DN DIR ' C3'1=1 Ule*$A9'"M 41r-e-EFIRE CHIEF. From: Kiser, Betsy RED FILE L3 ATTORNEY Q"pW DIR Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 5:12 PM 13'CLERKiORIG EY—POLICE CHF To: Carter, Andrew MEETING AGENDA Q DEPT HEADS 3-REC Dip r-- Pi_6 Cc: Lichtig, Katie Q�TIL DIR Subject RE: Portola Fountain Art �A ITEM # $� �_ m I R 91R nkvnes •&LILT 4_ Hi Andrew, �t_l" �2G2 Please see the responses to your questions below. ,Contact me if you need additional clarification. 1. Prior to Tuesday's meeting, I'm interested in some detail on the $130,000 budget for the public art. What else, if anything, does that include besides the cost of the art? On the surface, it seems like a high amount. The Portola Fountain public art budget includes: $125,000 for the artist commission and $5,000 for finalists stipends, plaque, dedication, and conditions required by the ARC/Council. The artist is responsible for all costs associated with the creation of the piece: engineering,fabrication, installation, attendance at jury reviews, ARC and Council meetings, lighting, etc. What remains is what the artist is paid for his artistic expression and idea. The amount of work required by staff, the jury and advisory boards/Council for any public art project(regardless of size and location) is relatively the same, therefore, 3 years ago the CIP Review Committee agreed to focus on fewer but larger, more elaborate pieces of public art. At 30 feet high the Portola Fountain project, if approved, will be the largest(in size)commissioned piece of art for the City. However, the piece is comparable to other City pieces in price. Iron Road Pioneers (at the Railroad roundabout)was purchased in 2002 for$100,000 (included $75,000 of donated funds), Puck (the statue in Downtown Centre)was purchased by the community in 2003 for$80,000 and Bequest(Monterey/Buena Vista)was commissioned for $88,000 in 2009. 2. Could you also provide some comparison costs for other recent art installed in the City? For instance, the Beebe sculpture at the Little Theatre, the obelisk in beside City Hall, the dancing people and cubes sculpture at the north end of Monterey Street, and the kids going up the spiral sculpture in Mitchell Park. Over the years, the City has been fortunate to work with a generous art community who has either raised funds or donated money or in-kind labor to acquire many of the City's pieces. In the programs infancy many of the pieces would not have been possible without such efforts; such as BeeBee Works His Magic($10,000 donated by family and Arts Obispo), Puck ($80,000 from 6 families in community), Garnet(donated by artist Kate Briton and Diane Blakeslee), Iron Road Pioneers(matched $50,000 of City funding with $75,000 from Friends of Iron Road Pioneers), Bear/Child Fountain (all donations), and the Seven Sisters Railing to name a few. Therefore, it challenging to provide comparable costs to current pieces in the City's collection. The fabrication and materials used for each piece also heavily influences the price point, for instance a bronze piece is more expensive than a stainless steel piece and a kinetic piece(such as the Portola Fountain) is more difficult to fabricate and therefore costs more than a stationary piece. Bequest is the most likely comparison with a budget of$90,000 ($88,000 for the artist commission); the three sculptures vary in size(15, 12 and 9 feet respectively). It is also important to note that the artist's commission includes all materials and installation costs as well as any cost associated with lighting. RECEIVE® JUN 15 2010 SLO CITY CLERK 3. The$130,000 funding chart for the art shows $42K in "In Lieu" and $88K in "General Fund." Am I correct that the"In Lieu" is developer-paid in lieu and the"General Fund" is the in lieu we charge ourselves? You are correct—the"In-Lieu"fund is developer paid fees ('/s% of project cost up to$50,000) and General Fund is a I% set-aside of estimated cost of eligible projects in its Capital Improvement Plan for public art.While the funding chart indicates the majority of funding being allocated from the General Fund, there are sufficient un-allocated "in-lieu"funds to cover the full cost of this project if the Council chooses to direct staff to do so.That being said, by ordinance, the General Fund allocations remain earmarked for public art and staff would eventually return to Council with proposed projects for these funds. 4. A reminder about how we have recently reduced the in lieu we charge ourselves would also be helpful. (As I recall, reduced rate and changes to how the base is calculated.) As part of the Council approved 2009-11 Financial Plan budget balancing strategies, the City's public art CIP contribution was decreased from 1% to 1/2% (reducing the public art budget by 50%). Betsy Kiser, Parks and Recreation Director City of San Luis Obispo 1341 Nipomo Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 tel 1805.781.7294 web www.slocitv.org/aarksandrecreation