pages: PublicArtCommission/2008-02-13.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PublicArtCommission | 2008-02-13 | 5 | Mr. Biggs reminded the commission that the City Council has to approve any expenditure of funds towards public art and that the commission should develop a recommendation. Ms. Huston mentioned some of the steps they have so far. Calling for public input, finding a site, and research and place art. She suggested keeping in mind that they will be expending money and to consider the ordinance. 4-C. (Formerly 4-B) Validity of Performance Arts as Fulfilling Public Art Requirements. Ms. Huston feels that it is difficult to enforce performance spaces for fulfillment of the art requirement and questions eliminating it from the ordinance. Ms. Lee suggested that the next projects be tangible things to see. Ms. Rosenberg said that they don't have enough experience dealing with that and feels that the cap hinders the ability to provide a quality performance space. Ms. Huston said that they are all feeling the same on the performance aspect and should approach future projects with caution in the future. Mr. Wolfe has an issue with respect to diversity. He mentioned that there have been two other performance spaces that have come to the commission and wonders how many more they need. He thinks that a quota may be helpful in limiting how many developers ask for a performance space as the public art requirement. Mr. Biggs responded by saying that it is ultimately up to the commission. They have the discretion to approve or deny a project. Ms. Rosenberg suggested a moratorium or a hold on a project until they determine if it is feasible. Mr. Biggs does not want to see the door closed on what may be coming down the line. Even if they propose eliminating performance art from the ordinance, the City Council may still like to see it retained as an option. Ms. Huston stated that the commission has approved two events-based projects out of five and will be reluctant to approve more in the future. Mr. Wolfe agreed with Ms. Huston and added that the intent is to create a diverse collection of art and performances and suggested that for the next year, they would prefer to approve non- performance based public art. Mr. Biggs suggested following the agenda topic more specifically. There was a motion to recognize that performance art can satisfy public art requirements; however, they would be concerned about approving future performance art proposals given the number that have already been approved and their desire to see a more diverse mix of public art. All were in favor. 5 | PublicArtCommission/2008-02-13.pdf |