pages: PublicArtCommission/2007-03-28.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PublicArtCommission | 2007-03-28 | 2 | create a Public Art Plan that is to be submitted to the City Council on an annual basis. She also identified the Public Art Fund and described how those funds could be used to promote art in Alameda. Ms. Woodbury stated that she is working with staff to create a more comprehensive work program, known as the Public Art Plan. She proceeded with a PowerPoint presentation. Some of the highlights included: Developing an Artist Resource brochure Creating a Public Art Map Assembling a Public Art Catalogue Establishing a public art review process Preparing an Alameda Public Art web page Explore the possibility of increasing the cap on public art fees Chair Huston thanked Ms. Woodbury for her presentation. Members of the public in attendance then commented on the Plan and made the following suggestions: Have the PAC require or encourage developers to have a "general call" for art proposals to fulfill their art requirement on new projects Encourage City officials to attend art and cultural events Provide more gallery space in Alameda, especially City-owned buildings Provide local artists and arts organizations more exposure Provide grant funding for arts programs or to improve facilities Reduce or eliminate fees for event space for art shows and cultural events Create an Arts Council Chair Huston then clarified the roles and responsibilities of the Public Art Commission. She stated that although desirable, some of the suggestions made by the audience were outside the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission. Commissioner Wolfe proposed amending the statute. Commissioner Cervantes proposed that the Public Art Commission expand their role in the community since they are now a Commission and not a committee. Ms. Woodbury talked about the revenues for the Commission and what they are to be used for. Ms. Carol Burnett mentioned that she is working with the City of Walnut Creek about some of the projects they are working on and she mentioned changing the ordinance. Chair Huston concurred with the point that Ms. Burnett made regarding the cap and how it affects the type and quality of public art projects. Commissioner Wolfe pointed out that the percentage of public art money within a project is relative to the budget as a whole and smaller projects pay more. The cap is disproportionate in larger projects. He also mentioned that the developer can choose whether or not they provide public art or pay the in lieu fee. | PublicArtCommission/2007-03-28.pdf |