pages: PublicArtCommission/2008-01-09.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PublicArtCommission | 2008-01-09 | 6 | Ms. Huston read the resolution PAC-06-02 for Bridgeside. If planning has not received the schedule, they are in non-compliance. Mr. Biggs said that it was relayed to him that they had not complied with the advertising condition as required. Mr. Wolfe pointed out that the sign was hidden out of view. Ms. Huston was ok with the sign. She moved to find them in non-compliance pending research to find out if the Planning Director has received the programming schedule and to find out if they can find them in non-compliance for the shape of the space. Ms. Rosenberg asked if they could suggest that they move their performance space closer to Nob Hill. She feels it is a much better site. Mr. Biggs stated that due to the process, they couldn't because of the channels that the project had to travel through. Ms. Rosenberg seconded Ms. Huston's motion to find Bridgeside in non-compliance. All were in favor. She would like to agendize the looking at the ordinance pertaining to performance spaces if they cannot properly enforce it. She feels that it is a weak spot in the ordinance. Ms. Huston welcomed Mr. Biggs as the new agenda maker and requested that there be an agenda item reviewing the viability of performance based art and spaces in the public art ordinance. Mr. Wolfe suggested amending the motion to change the wording regarding the shape of the space. He thinks it should address the ground form and grading. Ms. Huston suggested phrasing it very specifically. She would say that they have found the Bridgeside project in non-compliance on several points. One of them is a failure to fulfill the programming requirement both in number of performances, in submission of schedules, and in diversity of performances and advertising and that the physical space is incompatible both with the plans submitted and the use of the space. They would need further research to see if in fact the usability of the space in relation to lights, electricity, and audio equipment further create a non-compliance. They are ok with changing it if need be. Ms. Rosenberg said that they should have to go back and look at the space and make it viable for appropriate programming. Mr. Biggs said that if it is found to be that size or general grading, it wouldn't allow an opportunity to go back and have them rework the space. Ms. Lee remembered that Bridgeside wanted the process to happen quickly and acknowledged the commission's mistake in expediting their application. Mr. Biggs recommended that if during the initial hearing there are changes that need to be made, they don't approve the plans unless the applicant is there and notes the changes. 6 | PublicArtCommission/2008-01-09.pdf |