Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0416.095, • -. • .'. " . '.' . @ City of Palo Alto City .Manager's Report TO: HONORABLE COY COUNCIL A TTE!~TI()N: POLICY AND SERVICES COMMITI'EE FROM: CITY MANAGER AGENDA DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 1995 DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY SERVICES CMIt: 416:95 SUBJECT: ART IN PUBLIC PLACES PERCENT FOR ART ORDINANCE RW1JIST The Publi<: Art Commission is requesting that the Policy or.! SeMce. Committee remove the Percent for Art Ordinance from thei< agenda. RECOMMENDATIONS It i> recommended 1hat Cooncil remove the Percent fo< Art Ord"manee from !he liS! of items which have been referred 10 the PoIi<:y and Services Committee. POLlex IMJ'UCATIONS This staff report is consistent with currenl City poIi<:y. EXEClmu: SUMMARY IA September 1991, !he Council referred the Public Art Commission (Commiss;o.,) recommendatioo 10 the Policy and Seni<:<s Committee (Committee) regarding I Percent foe Art Ordinance. The draft ordinance proposed to establish a re'luiremenllo provide and maintain & wlllk of art in private deveklpment projects where the project exceeded 15,000 sqnare feet Also included was a provision which would h. YO required funding foe Munkipal capital projects. The Committee lim discussed the Commission's request cn December 3, 1991. The Committee asked staff and the Commis sioo 10 research .'lIrions percent for art ordinance alternatives and reluna 10 the Committee with a recommendalien. On May S, 1992, sWf presented 10 the Committee several pesoibl. alternatives 10 the percent for art ordinance. The Commission. however, continued 10 recommend their origin&l approaclt. of developing an oramance requiring a !"'fUnl ree from developers 10 be used 10 purchase public art At !hat time. the Committee enrouraged the Commission Ii> begin wodting with private developers with !he pmpose of helping them 10 understand the ;,." ',' ... o ntioDale behind adopting a program which would add new fe~ 10 the cost of development The Commit!« explained that I per~nt foe art ordinance would stand • !>et'.er c..'lan~ of opproval if IocaI developen were willin~ 10 tend their suppor1lO the concept To that end, the Commission began meeting with local developers; conducted several community-wide public forums 10 introduce 1bc Iopic 10 the woad cornmuni1y; and <><ganized I series of slide ~ns that illustrated the impact of public art programs on other communities. The n:suIt of the Commission's educUkmal G81tIpaign is that some private devel<>pecs bave offered 10 provide BIt 00 a voluntary basis IS I condition of cer<.ain projects. In additiou, the CoanciI recel!tIy increased the Art in Public Places C.pitallmpcovement Project funds, which will ailow the Commission 10 continoe purclwingworks of BIt for the City_ For those reascns, the Public Art Commission has decided DOl 10 pursue. percent for art ordinance at this time. They are currently s.tisfied with the inroads that have bee" made with the Planning Commission. the ArchitecturaJ Review Board, the IOwn architect. and . City staff whlch blS allowed the Commission some opportunities 10 provide input and advice regarding art in public and pri,·.te de.-elopment projects. The Commission. at I speciAJ meeting of July 16. 199.5, discussed the notion of not proceeding. at this time. willi • percent for BIt ardinaDce. In its place the Commission proposes 10 develop gIDdelines that private developcrs may use, if they choose 10 include art in their development projects. At their meeting of August 30, 1995. the Commission unanimously approved I motion reCOD1lI1eIlcfmg that. for the tim. being, the percent foe art ordinance be removed from the Committee agenda. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact related to this report. EN\lIRONMPITAI, ASSFSSMENI Not applicable. AITACHMENTS Letter !rom the Public Art C<>mmission PREPARED BY: Leon A Kaplan.. DireclOr Arts and Culture ._-----. ~'o ( CITY MA.."IAGER APPROVAL: cc: CMIl .. 41US August 31, 1995 Josepb Simitian. Mayor Palo Aho CItY Cooedl 250 !hmJltoo A veDOg Palo Abo. California 94301 Dear kJe: CitydR:aJ.oAlto ~ifCommunilys..vm 00 behalf 0( !he I'Ilblic Art Commission I am transtIiitting 10 you our reclJlIlI'ileIldatn regarding 'Ibe percett for art ordinance. A! our regu~ar meeting of August 30. 1995, Ihe CommL<Sion VO'"", unanimously 10 =ommend that Ihe Po!Jcy i.Dd Senices Committee remove the perceDl for art ordinance nem from theic agenda. The Commission has decided not Ie pursue a per-...ent for art ordinance. at this time~ because "": are currenCy satisfied' 'lJ"ith me inroads that have: been made with !he Ptannlng Commissioo, !he Architecrural Review Board. tho IDwn architect, and Cily staff thaI bas allowed Ihe I'Ilblic Art C<>mmission some oppocrunrue. 10 provide input and advice regarding art in public and private develop"",1lI projects. Instead. !he Commissinn bas de<:ided 10 develop guideliDes "bie. can be used by private developers shooId !hey cboose 10 include art in !heir deve1opme1ll projects. We are presenlly working ",ith Staff 10 develop these guidefmes. If you bave any quesOOll5 or concerns regarding this lales! action of the Commission please let me -mow. I can be reacbed during <be day at 327-762Q. In tbe meantime I, ainng with !he oIher I'Ilblic Art Commissioners, .. ish 10 thank yO<! ~ your IongstarHf1Ilg support of Palo Abo'. public an program. Sin=ely, O,at;tt/~_ ~th Wassennan. Co-chair I'Ilblic Art Commission cc City Counc~ I'Ilbfic Art Conunission Leon Kaplan, I'Ilblie Art Conunission Staff f13ison pm.4 Jb:,Ctlltw:alCenier L'Q3~Roo.d PaTnAlto,CA9O::B 415.3..."9.n21