SUPPORTS ITEM NO. 5
CS&B COMMITTEE AGENDA
DECEMBER 14, 1995
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: November 27, 1995
Dept. File No.: SP
TO: Standing Committee of City Services and Budgets
FROM: Director of Cultural Affairs, in consultation
with the Director Community Planning and the
City Engineer
SUBJECT: Civic Capital Public Art Project Allocations
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council approve budgets totalling $140,000 for public
art projects listed in Table 1, as follows:
- $45,000 to Greenways Local Connectors;
- $45,000 to the Residential Street Design Program;
- $50,000 for Civic Infrastructure Design;
with detailed budgets reported back for approval; source of
funds to be the Public Art Unallocated Budget.
B. THAT Council approve budgets totalling $103,000 from the
Public Art Unallocated Account for public art projects
listed in Table 2, as follows:
- $30,000 to the Greenways Ridgeway Project;
- $23,000 to the Public Art Maintenance Reserve;
- $12,000 to the Victoria Drive Bridge alcove;
- $13,000 to the 901 West Hastings process;
source of funds to be the Public Art unallocated Budget.
C. THAT Council approve a grant of up to $25,000 to the West
End Community Centre Association, for public art on the West
End Community Centre.
Recommendation C requires 8 affirmative votes.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of
A and B and submits C for CONSIDERATION.
COUNCIL POLICY
On October 4, 1990, City Council adopted a Civic Public Art Program to
begin fully with the 1994-1996 Capital Plan. Before the start of the
1994-1996 Capital Plan, Council allocated $689,00 to Civic public art,
including projects at Library Square ($550,000, Grandview Cut Bridges
($108,000) and Renfrew Library ($31,000).
On October 7, 1993, Council approved $1,000,000 for public art over
the course of the 1994-1996 Capital Plan. On May 19, 1994, Council
adopted the civic public art process (Appendix A).
PURPOSE
This report seeks Council approval of public art expenditures on nine
projects totalling $243,000. Table 1 identifies global budgets for
projects for which detailed budgets need to be reported back. Table 2
identifies projects for which budgets have been prepared. A later
report will recommend projects based on the balance of public art
funds remaining in the current Capital Plan.
BACKGROUND
Council adopted the Public Art Program in 1990, making a first
commitment of $550,000 for public art at Library Square. In 1993,
Council provided $108,000 for public art at Grandview Bridges, and
$31,000 for Renfrew Library. In 1993, Council committed $1,000,000
for public art as part of the 1994-1996 Capital Plan, and has approved
as part of the annual Capital Budget $255,000 (1994) and $425,000
(1995).
Council to date has approved public art projects totalling $145,500
from funds provided in the 1994 and 1995 program. These include 14
projects totalling $115,000 under the 1994 and 1995 Community Public
Art Program; $20,000 toward a Public Art Registry; and $10,500 for
local Greenways projects.
Private sector allocations in this period have totalled nearly $3.5
million, all at projects in the downtown peninsula. It is expected
that approximately $10 million will be allocated by other private-
sector projects over the next 15 years.
DISCUSSION
Most public art activity to date has been initiated by the private
sector in the Central Business District, or initiated in
neighbourhoods by the Community Public Art Program. The new projects
listed in Table 1 (following) begin to address a major Public Art
Program goal: to incorporate public art into the planning and
development process of other significant City initiatives. These
include Local Greenways Connectors, the
Greenways Ridgeway Pilot Project; the Residential Street Design
project; and the Infrastructure Design project. These projects all
have significant public art potential and a good community process
already in place. The criteria and process for iden-tifying these
projects were adopted in May, 1994 (Appendix A).
Budgets listed in Table 1 are for areas of activity (e.g., Greenways
local connectors) where staff will identify and detail specific
projects and budgets for report back.
Table 2 lists projects for which staff have reviewed detailed budgets
or (for the Greenways pilot) budget estimates. These projects would
proceed now, and not be reported back for approval.
Staff are also finalizing recommendations for public art at several
other capital projects, and will be seeking Council support for these
early in 1996.
Project descriptions follow Tables 1 and 2. Project budgets include
provisions for project administration and maintenance.
TABLE 1
Greenways Local Connectors $ 45,000
Residential Street Design Project 45,000
Infrastructure Design 50,000
140,000
Greenways Neighbourhood Connectors ($45,000)
Seven neighbourhoods are now working on local Greenways connectors.
If approved, a public art process would be integrated with the
Greenways process to develop projects based on local opportunities.
Funds would be available for art incorporated into local Greenways.
Recent projects at the Keefer Street Overpass, and the connector at
19th and Flemming are both based on strong community process and are
examples of anticipated results.
Residential Street Design ($45,000)
Like Greenways, this initiative emphasizes strong community process
and local input. Artists will work with City staff and residents to
provide art work expressing community ideas for the redefinition of
residential streets. One project has started on Garden Drive; a
second is expected to begin early in 1996. Detailed public art
projects and budgets would be reported back for approval.
Infrastructure Design ($50,000)
Many infrastructure elements -- street access covers, benches, lamps,
traffic circles -- are ideal opportunities for artists to create or
express aesthetic interest, civic pride, and neighbourhood identity.
Staff will review opportunities for artists to create new designs for
infrastructure elements in common use. Funds will be spent for art
and design work, not for manufacture.
TABLE 2
Table 2 projects include phase-one funding for artists on the
Greenways Pilot design team; funding for the maintenance of work
created before the Public Art Reserve was established; and
supplementary funding for projects already underway.
TABLE 2
Greenways Ridgeway Pilot Project $ 30,000
Maintenance Provision for Existing Work 23,000
Grandview Cut Viewing Platform 12,000
901 West Hastings 13,000
West End Community Centre 25,000
$103,000
Greenways Ridgeway Pilot Project ($30,000)
This Pilot project is an opportunity for artists to contribute to the
concept and design of this first major Greenway. Artists will join
the design process as full partners. They will address the continuity
of the overall design, express individual neighbourhood identity, and
identify, with other consultants, opportunities for public art along
the way. This allocation would pay artist fees for up to three
artists to join the design team. Pending the outcome of this design
development phase, staff will request additional funds for projects
identified in phase one.
Maintenance Provisions for Existing Public Art ($23,000)
Maintenance provisions for art works created before July 1995, were
deferred, pending start-up of the Public Art Maintenance Reserve. A
one-time allocation of $23,000 to the Reserve is recommended to
provide for Grandview Cut projects; for 1994 and 1995 Community Public
Art projects; for the Keefer Street Rail Overpass Mural; and for the
19th and Fleming Greenways project.
Since the Maintenance Reserve was established, maintenance provisions
have been included in project budgets. Maintenance Reserve
allocations are for extraordinary maintenance or repair, not for
routine cleaning. Allocations from the Reserve are reported for
Council approval.
Grandview Cut Telescope Viewing Platform ($12,000)
A platform on Victoria Bridge was built to enable telescope users to
view, in safety, a project in Grandview Cut. Despite making the
generous contingency provision recommended by the Project Engineer,
the construction cost of the alcove exceeded estimates by $12,000.
Noting that the original public art budget of $108,000 was drawn from
the Streets Unallocated Budget, Cultural Affairs staff recommend the
cost of this overrun be covered by the Public Art budget.
Enhanced Public Process, 901 West Hastings ($13,000)
The current public art process for this site has sparked unprecedented
public interest. To increase public access to the process, the Public
Art Committee recommends that short-listed proposals, when selected,
be placed on public view, and other opportunities for public input be
explored. Written public comment on the short-list proposals would be
passed to the selection panel, in a process similar to the selection
of Library Square. Staff note the project budget of $127,000
originated in the private sector, and the $13,000 in City funds would
be used to enhance public participation in the process. Funds would
be used for public display of the short-list models, including display
cases, advertising, gathering public comments, and co-ordination
costs.
West End Community Centre ($25,000*)
Artist Tiko Kerr's selection through the Park Board Artist in
Residence program initiated a model community consultation process for
public art at WECC. With the endorsement of WECC architect Joe Wai,
the artist has begun to incorporate into the building's exterior
surface, murals which draw inspiration from the experience and history
of West End residents. This allocation would contribute a portion of
the cost of art work and murals at the entrance to the building.
* Because this allocation would be a grant to the West End
Community Centre Association, the pro-ject sponsor, 8
affirmative votes are required.
TABLE 3
Table 3 shows previous Public Art expenditures (including $25,000 for
Community public Art from Vancouver Foundation); the allocations
recommended in Tables 1 and 2 above; and funds provided in the 1994
and 1995 Capital Plans:
TABLE 3
Expenditures Approved to date $170,500 **
Expenditures Recommended in Table 1 140,000
Expenditures Recommended in Table 2 103,000
413,500
Funds Provided in the 1994 Capital Plan 255,000
Funds provided in the 1995 Capital Plan 426,000
Funds Provided by Vancouver Foundation 25,000
706,000
Current Unallocated 292,500
** Includes $25,000 for Community Public Art pro-vided by
Vancouver Foundation.
Staff are preparing recommendations for projects based on
unallocated public art funds, including $319,000 anticipated in the
1996 Capital Plan, and will report these to Council early in 1996.
PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE
At its meeting of November 20, 1995, the Public Art Committee
reaffirmed the value of distributing public art funds beyond the
downtown district, and endorsed the expenditures recommended above.
* * * * *
APPENDIX A
1 of 4
PUBLIC ART PROCESS
FOR CIVIC CAPITAL WORKS
A civic interdepartmental public art planning group reviewed all
projects in the present capital plan and identified a short list based
on the strongest opportunities for public art. This short list was
then reviewed by the Public Art Committee, which encouraged staff to
pursue projects outside the Central Business District, where most
private-sector public art dollars are spent.
The Guidelines governing the civic public art process, including the
process for project identification, were adopted by Council in May,
1994, and are as follows:
1. PURPOSE
These Guidelines describe in general terms the public art process
for public art at new and existing civic capital projects. They
describe the roles of City Council, Park Board, civic staff and
the Public Art Committee. The aim is to ensure art selection by
an independent, publicly accountable process which combines
expert evaluation and community consultation.
2. PUBLIC ART PROGRAM (adopted 1990)
The goals of the Public Art Program are to:
i) Enrich the community be means of public art;
ii) Provide leadership in public art planning and seek its
inclusion in all public realm development in Vancouver,
whether in the civic, private or other public sector;
iii) Include artists, when possible, in civic planning processes
touching the public realm;
iv) Extend participation by citizens in the cultural and
physical development of the City;
v) Contribute to cultural development by developing public art,
in addition to supplying it;
vi) Ensure the quality of proposed art, and its relevance to the
community and site, by means of an arm's-length selection
process incorporating community input and professional
advice.
APPENDIX A
2 of 4
3. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA
The Public Art Program Manager in consultation with staff from
civic departments and the Public Art Committee will review and
identify opportunities for public art associated with new or
existing capital works, according to the following criteria:
- projects have a high degree of public use or public realm
impact;
- public art could advance capital project goals or readily
achieve other civic objectives such as information or
interpretive programs, anti-graffiti initiatives, Greenways
goals, etc.;
- projects provide opportunities for a community process; and
- Factors such as the presence of other art works or amenities
in the area, or the opportunity for an art project to respond
successfully to a need identified in the community, or other
funding, will also be considered.
4. THE PUBLIC ART PLAN
The Interdepartmental Public Art Planning (Staff) Team and the
Public Art Committee (PAC) will advise on preparation of the
Public Art Plan. The Public Art Plan sets out the budget,
proposed artist participation, the selection process, the
community process, and other matters as needed. The Public Art
Committee will review and recommend the Art Plan to the Director
of Social Planning for report to City Council for budget approval
and authority to initiate projects and enter contracts with
artists. Projects on Park Lands will be reported to Park Board
by the Parks Board representative.
5. INTERDEPARTMENTAL PUBLIC ART PLANNING TEAM
The Interdepartmental Public Art Planning Team (Staff Team) is
made up of representatives from Engineering, Housing &
Properties, Planning, Permits & Licenses, Parks and Finance.
Members advise the Team of departmental issues and priorities,
and advise their departments of Public Art Program provisions.
The Staff Team will assist in project identification and will
advise generally on project development and implementation
issues. The Staff Team will maintain departmental liaison for
project implementation.
APPENDIX A
3 of 4
6. PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE
The Public Art Committee (PAC) advises on all aspects of the
public art process. The Committee recommends on project priority
and on Public Art Plans which set terms of reference for artist
participation and selection. PAC recommendations are conveyed by
the Public Art Program Manager to the Director of Social
Planning, who reports them to City Council, or the Parks Staff
Team representa-tive, who reports them to park Board.
7. SELECTION METHODS
Artist selection methods will be detailed in the Public Art Plan.
Artists or artist proposals will generally be selected by a panel
process, and panelists will be recommended by the Public Art
Committee. The intent is to ensure artists are selected on merit
by a process informed by expertise and community input.
Proposals by artists will generally be solicited through open
competition, invited submission, or direct commission.
8. SELECTION PANEL COMPOSITION
Selection panels usually consist of 3 to 5 voting members and
non-voting advisors as needed to supply technical or community
advice. The panel process will incorporate or provide access for
neighbourhood input or representation, and panels will reflect
community diversity.
A typical panel might consist of the following:
- project engineers, architects or representatives
- artists
- curators or other visual arts professionals
- community representatives
Typical panel advisors might be:
- residents
- project staff
- technical staff
9. SELECTION PANEL TERMS OF REFERENCE
Terms of reference for the selection panel will be set at the
project development stage by the Staff Team in conjunction with
the Public Art Committee. On larger projects it may be desirable
to give panels broad terms of reference and responsibility for
determining sites, budgets, the nature of the artist
participation and recommended selection processes. APPENDIX A
4 of 4
10. SELECTION CRITERIA
Artists will be selected by majority vote on the basis of their
qualifications as demonstrated by previous work, the
appropriateness of their proposal to the project, and its
probability of successful completion.
Artist proposals will be selected by majority vote which best
meet project terms of reference and Public Art Program goals;
which have the most artistic merit, are site and community
responsive, technically feasible, and have a high probability of
success.
The selection panel and technical advisors will consider the
proposal's materials, construction, durability, maintenance,
public access, and safety.
Selection panels have the option of making no selection, in which
case the selection process could, on the advice of the Public Art
Committee, be re-opened.
11. PANEL REMUNERATION
Panelists invited to deliver an expert evaluation of artist
proposals will be paid honoraria based on $200 per day to a
maximum of $500.
12. PROPOSAL REVIEW
The project coordinator in conjunction with participating
departments will ensure all proposals are reviewed prior to final
selection for safety and liability, compliance with City by-laws
and requirements, technical feasibility, budget and cost
integrity, and other aspects as needed. No final selection will
be made or announced until any question on these issues is
resolved.
13. COMMISSION PROCESS
Artists will be contracted as needed to provide proposals,
maquettes and commissions.
14. PROJECT DOCUMENTATION & REGISTRATION
Project documentation including project maintenance details will
be registered in the City's Public Art Inventory.
* * * * *