TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Bruce Moe, City Manager
FROM:
Mark Leyman, Parks and Recreation Director
Eilen Stewart, Cultural Arts Manager
SUBJECT:Title
Cultural Arts Commission Recommendations for Sculpture Garden Options (Parks and Recreation Director Leyman).
(Estimated Time: 30 Mins.)
DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION
Body
_________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction on Cultural Arts Commission recommendations for sculpture garden options.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
If approved, staff will develop an appropriate budget and return for allocation of funds from the Public Art Trust Fund.
BACKGROUND:
At the March 7, 2023 meeting, City Council directed the Cultural Arts Commission to develop a work plan of several items including the Sculpture Garden program. First launched in 2009, this “Pot and Pole” program placed large scale temporary sculptures on loan to the City for a specified amount of time. The Sculpture Garden was a successful program initially, but, staff soon began to notice a significant decline in the number and quality of submissions for this program. The program relied on nearby cities participating with similar parameters, which allowed works of art to move throughout the region. As the popularity of the program decreased, there were fewer works of quality art available, even with increased marketing and outreach efforts. After multiple significant changes which yielded marginally improved results, the Sculpture Garden program was put on hold until it could be reexamined. The Cultural Arts Commission identified this program as an important public art opportunity that was impactful enough to dedicate time to making it function as desired.
DISCUSSION:
Staff worked with the Cultural Arts Commission to identify the strengths and challenges of the Sculpture Garden program based on previous iterations and similar programs from other municipalities. Staff developed four options for how the program may continue in the future:
Option 1 - Traditional Sculpture Garden
After identifying locations for sculptures, loose parameters (size, content etc.) would be established and a Request For Proposals (RFP) issued. Following selection, each artist would be personally responsible for obtaining engineering plans/specs, permits (including Coastal Development Permit where applicable), installation equipment and personnel, and all other aspects associated with installing a large outdoor structure. This places a tremendous amount of work and expense on the artist and will need to be offset in the timeline and budget. Artworks would take 6 - 12 months after approval to install and would be changed out every two years.
Option 2 - Permanent Sculpture
Because the time, labor, and cost commitment required for large outdoor artworks is so great, it may be more efficient to commission permanent artworks of similar scope, as all engineering, permitting, and construction/installation costs are the same whether the artwork is permanent or temporary. A new permanent artwork could be acquired for roughly the same cost of a single loan term of a temporary artwork and the City could continue to expand its permanent collection.
Option 3 - Blanket Permit/Engineering Program (Pot and Pole)
The original iteration of Sculpture Garden in Manhattan Beach was a Pot and Pole program - artists were given a set of very rigid parameters for their artwork, which allowed the city to rely on the engineering specs of the central pole, not the artwork itself. Many Southern California cities participated in this program and all held the same parameters. This allowed artists to create an artwork and have it ‘travel’ on loan from one city to the next, thereby recouping the cost of manufacturing the work. This style of program was necessarily extremely restrictive and fell out of fashion several years ago, with most nearby cities permanently changing or cancelling it. This in turn resulted in much fewer and less creative submissions for Manhattan Beach.
It is possible to recreate a version of this program which would revolve around a solid structure (concrete foundation, slab with particular bolt pattern for installation, etc.) for which a blanket permit as well as blanket engineering specs could be developed. In order to accomplish this, the parameters for the qualifying artworks would necessarily be extremely rigid and unwavering. Due to this limitation, staff does not anticipate a high level of interest in this program from qualified artists.
Option 4 - Smaller Sculptures Placed Outside the Coastal Zone, Not Requiring Permits
While all development west of Valley Drive (and some areas west of Ardmore Avenue) requires a Coastal Development Permit and all structures over six feet tall require a Building Permit (including engineering stamp and specs) and possibly other permits, structures under five and a half feet and east of Valley Drive (and east of Ardmore Avenue between 9th and 21st Streets) are exempt from these requirements. Several municipalities have taken advantage of this by creating Sculpture Garden programs that rely on much smaller artworks that can be placed in small groupings and installed at a fraction of the cost and time needed for the traditional Sculpture Garden pieces. These pieces are installed on preexisting pedestals (to be designed, sourced, and installed if approved) and can be rotated out with much greater frequency. These smaller artworks would also open an opportunity for less experienced artists to participate in the program, significantly widening the pool of applicants and creating opportunities for artists with less experience and financial backing, who would not otherwise be able to participate in public art.
If approved, staff will work with Community Development, Public Works, Building Safety, and Risk Management to develop parameters under which these artworks will not necessitate permits, and will not present a safety hazard to the public. Once the parameters for the artwork and pedestals are developed, artwork can be installed as readily as one to two months after approval.
The Cultural Arts Commission evaluated these options and recommended the following course of action:
Pursue Option 1 with a new timeline and budget that will accommodate the expanded workload and expense associated with the necessary engineering and permits. As this option may take 12 - 24 months to complete, simultaneously, pursue Option 4 to install three groupings of three pedestals with smaller sculptures which could be researched and installed in as little as 8 - 12 months.
Proposed Budget:
• Option 1 - $25,000 per artwork, per two-year loan, three artworks/locations
o $75,000 every two years for the duration of the program (additional funding may be necessary to prepare locations for artwork, Public Works may be able to assist with this work).
• Option 4 - $5,000 per artwork, per one-year loan, nine artworks, three locations
o $45,000 per year for the duration of the program
o $45,000 (one time cost) -$5,000 per pedestal
Total for the first year of the bifurcated Sculpture Garden Program - $165,000
Ongoing annual costs: Year one $120,000, Year two $45,000
Staff recommends City Council discuss and provide direction on the available options and the Cultural Arts Commission recommendations for the Sculpture Garden program. If approved, staff will return to City Council with timeline and budget for allocation of funds.
PUBLIC OUTREACH:
This item was reviewed by the Cultural Arts Commission at the June 19 and July 17, 2023 meetings.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The City has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that this action is not a project under CEQA, pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, as the action has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Although environmental review is not necessary at this time, additional environmental review will be required, as applicable, prior to the approval of any future project-specific development entitlements including, but not limited to a Coastal Development Permit.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney has reviewed this report and determined that no additional legal analysis is necessary.
ATTACHMENT:
1. PowerPoint Presentation