pages: PlanningBoard/2021-04-26.pdf, 12
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-04-26 | 12 | Board Member Curtis said he could support 90% of this amendment. The part that gave him trouble was the first part that required the developer to declare their intentions to install the artwork and where they will install it onsite. He thought the rest of the amendments provided fiscal responsibility and flexibility on where the funding was going. He was concerned from the developer's standpoint and saw this as a distraction for the developer during the planning stage. He discussed how the developers had to juggle many things including overall costs. He said he would not support the part of the amendment about having developers declare at the onset but the rest he thought was great. Vice President Saheba discussed the philosophical importance of art in the community and how it should enhance the environment it was in. He addressed Board Member Curtis's concern about declaring early and said it needed to be integral and shouldn't be an afterthought. He said there should be flexibility created for Affordable Housing and Landscape Art, they should be open to different ways of enhancing the environment. He said overall he supported these amendments but as they got closer to the Housing Element some other creative ideas needed to come about to reach the ultimate intent. Board Member Cisneros also had concerns with making developers declare early when they were unsure of the future of their project. She was curious to know what the response and feedback had been from the developer community. She agreed there needed to be more flexibility added that other than that reservation she was generally supportive. Board Member Ruiz said in general she supported the proposed amendments. While she did appreciate Board Member Curtis's comments and concerns for the Development Community, if you want a thoughtful and well-designed community in projects you would want to think about public art from the get-go and incorporate it as part of the overall project. She echoed Board Member Cisneros's comment about building in more flexibility that would allow the developers to change course later on if budget becomes an issue. She recommended adding green walls or living walls as part of classified public art. She spoke candidly about landscape architects who specialize in living walls who would do a better job than someone considered an artist. She did not want anything to limit the ability to create a better environment for the community. She wanted allocation to be clarified so a developer could do some onsite art and then the rest could go to the general fund. She also wanted the Art Commission to revisit the definitions for both the art and the artist. President Teague thanked everyone for their work on this. He brought up section 30-98.6 which discussed findings, he wanted to know what stage was the Final Approval of the Development Project Application. Director Thomas said he interpreted that as part of the Planning Entitlement, for most projects end with the Planning Board. He added that a Development Agreement never goes alone. He went on to say that the board had raised some very interesting considerations but that his experience with developers was that it was a good idea to force developers to think about the art early on. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 12 of 18 April 26, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-04-26.pdf |