Loading...
APPMIN 04 03 1995ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES LA QU[NTA CITY HALL• NORTR CONFERENCE ROOM APRIL 3, 1995 The regular meeting of the Art in Public Places Committee was called to order at 3:12 P.M. by Chairman Walling. ROLL CALL: Committee Members Aull, Lair, Shamir, Wolff, Nard, and Chairman Walling STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Jerry Herman and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer CONSENT CALENDAR: There being no corrections to the Minutes of March 6,1995, Committee Members Wo1fflHull moved and seconded a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. There being no corrections or questions to the Financial Statement, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Nard/Wolff to approve the statement as submitted. Unanimously approved. A. Art 3eleetion for the La O,uinta Shoonang Center. 1. Presentation by Ron Pekar. Mr. Pekar gave background on has qualifications. He stated he had talked with Mike Horton, the landscape architect for the project, regarding the site and had felt the area incorporated three essential ideas: a. Landscape farms • steel mountainous shapes similar to the mountains surrounding La Quanta. Steel shapes fixed and set on top of native boulders set into the site that would provide a sculpture panorama. Various colors of vaolets and earth tones. b. Cast concrete farms utilizing mountain textures with strata in a profile of the mountains. c. Geyser like forms, using colors and forms spouting out of rock forms placed strategically to be seen from the street as well as from the bank and restaurant buildings. It would be viewed from all around. In the day-light hours the water would be seen and at a time the water would take on colors of red, yellow and blue. The artistic concept would be landscape forms with a feeling of day and night. APP93 Art lu Public Places Apr113, 1995 d. Each concept would be workable in terms of budget as Mr. Pekar was anxious to have his work in La Quanta so it could be seen. This work would be a showcasing for him. 2. Mr. Pekar then showed slides of his work to illustrate the scope of his work. 3. Committee Member Wolff asked if the three concepts would be nestled. Mr. Pekar stated his concept was to use the site as an envelope and have the sculpture wrap around and sit above the retention basin. The basin would lead up into the sculpture to serve as a mat to embellish the artwork. The sculpture would be visible from all angles and would create a panorama on the back side of the retention basin (not the street side} It could be very tall or not. The highest point would be 8.10 feet. 4. Committee Member Lair asked if the options he presented could all be done for the 513000 budget. Mr. Pekar stated yes and this would be a showcase not a profit project. Committee Member Lair asked if the artwork was within the realm of the budget. Mr. Pekar stated it was. Committee Member Lair asked if Mr. Pekar paid the students who worked with him. Mr. Pekar stated he did pay his students. It wasn't a lot but they were an~ous to work on projects even if there was ne pay just to have the opportunity to work. Mr. Pekar stated the project becomes el~oyabie and sometimes works as an internship program for the students. 5. Committee Member Shamir asked about the maintenance -water versus no water. She also asked that color be utilized in the project. Mr. Pekar stated that maintenance would be necessary for Proposal #3. Proposals #1 and #2 world require no maintenance. Additionally, he stated, color could be added into the concrete and steel was already very colorful. 6. Mr. Pekar stated he understood there might be a possibihty of funds left aver to embellish the project. He hoped with a spirit of cooperation there might be an opportunity to get additional funds out of a Fairly restrictive budget. He asked if the proposed fountain for site was firm as he was hoping to incorporate #3 with this fountain. The maintenance should be simple. There was a possibility of incorporating water in one of the three concepts to have the water running down the mountains. The cost and aesthetics must work together. 7. Committee Member Lair asked what Mr. Pekar's availabihty was. Mr. Pekar stated he was a teacher who teaches teachers to teach. 8. There being no further discussion Chairman Walling thanked Ron Pekar far his presentation. Mr. Pekar thanked everyone for the opportunity. APP43 Art in Pubnc Places Apri13,1995 9. Committee Member Lair explained the artwork illustrations she had received from Mr. Jack Mackie and displayed some books illustrating his work. She then showed slides that he sent for the Committee's reviewing. 10. Staff then placed a call to Mr. Mackie and he explained some of the slides. Scottsdale - raised the building and gained the steps and saved money by building down instead of up. Expanded construction dollars to create images that would be useful, functional pieces. Maximized the construction budget to incorporate the art. Chattanooga -The stair scope is a form of the local mountains as well as the landscaping. The fountain breaks and flows theough the site. The concrete breaks open. The paving patterns were a result of investJgations of the local art e~f weaving from the area. 11. Mr. Mackie stated he preferred to work in collaboration rather than solo o:n projects. He preferred the stimulus from other forms of work. 12. Chairman Walling asked Mr. Mackie about the budget proposal. Mr. Mackie stated he would like to find matching funds or other resources as his initial cost would be 52250 to just come down and work with architectsllands architect to formulate an idea. 13. Committee Member Wolff informed Mr. Mackie that all the construction of the shopping center was completed with the exception of these two buildings and the retention basin. Mr. Mackie stated he would like to have the opportunity to work with the landscape team or hydealagist and look at some of the indigenous plants. 14. Chalrman Walling thanked Mr. Mackie for his time and for sending samples of his work. 15. Committee members discussed the two proposals. Chairman Walling stated he thought Mr. Mackie was redesigning the idea of the retention basin and the funds would go for developing the idea. 16. Chairman Walling felt the artist should utilize the idea of the retention basin to create a design and cut costs. 17. Staff presented what the developerlrestaurant owner wants. Chairman Walling felt they should otter all three artists to the developer and let him determine which one they would like to work with. 18. Committee members discussed what was to be the project and the money involved. APP43 Art in Public Places April 3, 1995 19. Staff suggested the Committee glue the names to the developer and inform him that the Committee was willing to commit the funds that are due from the Center. Staff explained the process of approving the art. 20. Committee Member Hull stated she felt one of the artists was a little weaker and possibly they should only recommend two. She felt the Committee needed to make a determination from the information presented in order to have the APP make the decision as to which artist(s) they would select. 21. Committee Member Shamis stated she felt the Committee should give the develeper a name and let the developer work with him. 22. Committee Member Hull stated she Pelt they needed more information to make a decision between the three artists. She was concerned about Mr. Mackie bP.cause he preferred to work with a team and was not an independent worker as well as the cost. She liked the creative thinking of Mr. Simpson and his method of using of land. It was very creative. Mr. Pekar was also very creative and additionally he was willing to work within the budget to put everything together. 23. Committee Member Lair stated she did not thing Mr. Mackie's preference to work in teams was a weakness. She was concerned about Mr. Pekar work in that it appeared to be a preconceived idea before seeing the site, and this design was similar to his other work. APP is about the process. Mr. Simpson was very physical and the landscaping was a practical with a sociological approach. She felt Mr. Mackie was people oriented and Mr. Pekar was visual. In addition, she felt this process was unfair to each one of the artists. 24. Committee discussion: Need to spend more time and see who is interested. Need to recommend all three artists and let the developer decide wllo he feels is more appropriate. Need the concept and ideas to click with the developer. Need to create an excitement between the artist and developer. Need to determine how best to handle the contact between the developer and artist Should the APP invite them to come again and pay their expenses. Felt the staff should contact the developer to get some d[rection as to what he would like to chose Prom. 25. Committee Member Nard suggested staff contact Mr. Koenig to have he and Mr. Horton, the landscape architect, view the slides of the three artists and to see what they think. The APP would relate they have confidence in all three artists to create a product of value. APP4-3 Art b1 Pubhc Places Aprl13, 1995 26. Committee Member Lair gave a description of Buster Simpson and explained some of his work. She stated he was into environmental conceptual projects. 27. Following discussion it was determined that staff would recommend all three artists to the developer and let him make the determination. B. Discussion Regarding a Joint Meeting of an All-Vallev Joint Meetin¢ 1. Chairman walling went over the outline agenda for the meeting. Committee Member Lair would give a tour of the Civic Art purchases while Community Development Director Jerry Herman would describe the new City Hall. The group would then return to the Councll Chambers for a brainstorming of ideas. 2. The Committee took a tour of the Council Chambers to see what was available and discussed preparation for the meeting as weD as what the presentation packets would contain. C. Due to the hour, it was move and seconded to continue the remainder of the Agenda Items to next meeting. Unanimously approved ADJOURNMENT: There being na further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members wolfflShamis to adjourn to a regular meeting of the Art in Public Places Committee on May 1, 1995, at 3:00 P.M. in the North Conference Room. This meeting of the Art in Public Places Committee was adjourned at 5:40 P.M. April 3,1995. APP4~3