Alameda City Public Art Commission 12/16/2024
Transcript
You may also submit written comments to me by emailing me at jkeliiaa atalamedaca.gov. Comments submitted during the meeting before the conclusion of public comments section will be read into record. My email address is also on the meeting’s agenda. If a remote participant is having difficulty, I suggest that you call using the number 669-444-9171, and meeting ID 896-4208 1044.
This information is also at the top of the agenda. People participating via telephone have to please press star 9 to raise your hand, and star 6 to unmute. For For in person participation, a speaker slip must be submitted to speak on any item. There are speaker slips located over there on the chair with with pins. If the commissioner would like to speak, please physically raise your hand, and the chair will acknowledge your request. That chat function has been turned off. Alright. Thank you. Okay. The meeting is now called to order.
The time is 6:0:5 pm. Roll call. Commissioner Liz Rush? Present. Commissioner Robert Ferguson? Present. Commissioner Peter Plotsgumer? Present. Commissioner Lisa Martin, absent. Commissioner James Martin, absent.
Staff members, Jackie, present. And Duane Dahlman. Present. All right. Hey, comments from the audience may concern matters either on or not on the agenda, but must deal with matters subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Arts Commission. Comments will be limited to 3 minutes. Comments concerning matters on this evening’s agenda will be heard when that item is called. Halia’a, do you have any items to read into the record? Public comments? Yes.
I do have a public comment from Rachel Campos de Ivanoff. And rate oh, sorry. You can actually come over here and speak because we would like to for your comments to be recorded. This guy? What are you so you’re in the as long as you’re in the, the frame, you can you can speak here. Hi. Rachel Campos de Eignoff. I am a board member of the Westin Earth District, and I’m also staff for Radium. And Jeff wanted to share a quick update about a wonderful event that we hosted this past weekend, which was called Capture the King Tides. This was a collaborative effort with Westin Arts District, Radium, NASA, Greenbelt Alliance.
We braved the wind, the rain, power outfits. Wow. 40 mile an hour away and miraculously 25 people showed up for a free iPhone photography workshop. And it was a wonderful collaboration of being able to highlight through an artistic lens the work that the city is doing, for climate adaptation. So this was a quick pop up event that we did as part of the rising tides project and as a warm up to, a bigger initiative that would be coming in May called In Plain Sight that will be happening at Radium, which is again, also part of the Rising Tides initiative. So that program will be scheduled starting May 9th for about 3 weeks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.
Raise your hand if you’d like to provide public comments unrelated to an item on the agenda. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? All right. That brings us to the regular agenda. Okay. Which is to review and approve the October 21st, draft pack minutes. Commissioners? No objection. Okay. That is approved as written.
Do you have any other motion? Yeah. I think we do. Yes. I motion we approve the minutes as written. Okay. Okay. Approve. K. Review and approve the September 18th draft packed minutes.
I have no changes. Because I think I’m barking too much in these briefings. I motion to, approve, the Minutes as written. Great. Both are done. All right. All right. Regular agenda items. First up, Alameda Recreational and Parks Department, Aquatic Park, Public Art Opportunity Presentation. Yes, please.
And then I’m gonna go ahead and share our screen. Off the screen. And make sure you introduce yourself. I will. My name is Patrick Ressy. I am the recreation manager. I’m also joined by Stacy Thomas, a aquatic specialist, in our department. Well, I want to thank you guys all for coming out and listening to this presentation. I think it’s gonna be really great opportunity for the Public Art Commission. Little known fact, the Public Art Commission did start in the recreation department when it first started.
Many, many years ago. In fact, I was the staff person in charge of it back then. So, so as you may or may not know, hopefully, you do know that we are going to be creating a new first ever Alameda Aquatic Center, in on the footprint of what is the Gene Sweeney open space preserved park. It’s, we’ve never had a facility in Alameda. We’ve always shared facility with the school district or with other nonprofits. So we’re quite excited to finally have a facility that we can use, as much as possible. Because when for many years, we only had access to pools, for 8 weeks during the summer. And now we are going, year round. Especially COVID kinda changed things and opens the world up to alternative schedules. And so now we’re we have an aquatic need to go year round.
People wanna swim year round. They wanna use it as exercise. So, like, so we’re really excited. And it’s most exciting is this is gonna be an all electric 0 greenhouse gas emission demonstration project that, we’re working with, many city departments, especially AMP, who’s gonna be helping, do some demonstration, things out of the facility. So we’ll provide it. So if you’re familiar with Gene Sweeney, it’s a 26 Acre Park. This is the far West side of Gene Sweeney Park, on the corner of Constitution and Atlantic is that’s where you see the Atlantic up there. So the that is what it currently exists there now. I don’t think it looks as nice as that, but, that’s, what exists there now. We do have some public art there already.
If you look down below, right above the Gene Sweeney, there is a, right there. Thank you. Is the, Mormon, California, the tides of California, Mesa California, totem poles that are there. Mhmm. Gene Sweeney actually does have several, public art pieces in it, which is super nice, and I think, adds to the element of the park. So, that’s the footprint of what’s going to become the aquatic center, but now let’s see what the vision is for the aquatic center. So that’s what the aquatic that space is going to occupy. We are quite excited about it, and we’ve had lots of we’ve had many, many, many public meetings and, many, debates back and forth about what what how it was gonna come out. And so this was very, very publicly vetted. And we feel that this is is the best, facility that we’re gonna move forward with.
And this is the 1 that we’re we’re getting designs out with, and eventually we’ll have an RFP going out, hopefully next year at some point. Right? Tracy. So what I do think though, if you see that, it it lends itself for a great opportunity for some public art to be infused into the project. And if you click to the next slide, is we we kind of identified some areas that will be really great opportunities. We anticipate over a 175 to 200000 people coming to this facility, each year. So it’s gonna be highly visible. And I think it’ll be a great opportunity to showcase public art. And it also gives an opportunity, in my personal opinion to give, 1 of the major thoroughfares of Alameda, some sort of gateway art piece that I think has been missing. So that the 1 on the far left where it says gateway, that is, again, it’s it’s a little bit farther away from the facility.
But right now, if you drive down there, all you see is a little bench out there that says Jean Sweeney on it. And, and I think there were lots of different plans over the years and it was eventually going to be built out, but this gives us an opportunity to put a signature piece, right there as as everyone goes by there. It’s a major, venue place. And that and that could go lots of different ways. I mean, obviously, it’s it could be an an access point. It could be, you know, something, that incorporates both aquatic and gene swinging in it. I think that gives it a good a good spot. I will move over to the out to the far right where the plaza is. That’s gonna be as people are coming in from the parking lot. And I think that’s that would be a nice signature, public art, a place for a good public art piece, welcoming people or however wanted to.
I think there’s good opportunities, to be out there. And remember this facility again is, being, used also by AMP as a demonstration facility for their 0 emissions, transmissions. The other 2 places, a little bit different and a little bit, not necessarily pieces, but, the wind wall is a wall that is gonna be partially a wall and then partially a fence that goes up in some places to 10 feet and then some at 15 depending on the elevation. And I think there was some opportunities to share a story of aquatics or to do something within the fencing. Do you wanna, the, I forget the tech terminal technology of it, but I’ve seen where they, they take the metal fences and they do artwork sketch on it. They Punch out. Punch out. Thank you. I the technical word. And I think we’re gonna see some and then the last opportunity is, the green tree those green circles are trees, but they don’t exist now.
I mean, I I mean, they’re not they’re a little there’s a few of them there, but not many. But they’re the back wall of the, the building right there will also be facing, the street of the Atlantic. And so that also gives another opportunity for a mural style or some of the public art that could go along there. You know, so I think it it gives an opportunity, many opportunities for public art. And I think it, it also be a good showcase for public art because I think the amount of attention that they get here, because again, unless you are, I I know Liz, you’re a really regular park person and you’re going into the parks. Some of the public art pieces are in places where people just don’t get to experience them as much. Like those columns. Yes. Well, so the beauty of the on that, of the columns, actually, I think the columns will get better exposure because the they’re gonna be doing that pathway that goes below it. Yeah.
We’ll open up right now. It’s not open. So that will be a pathway that goes across the the, the call the columns all the way to the street of Atlantic. That’d be wonderful. So and and that’s the plan on on a couple of those. Even the 1 that I think the other public art was down closer. There’s a mania and that have cut through, and I think goes out to the egg in in Marina Village, in that area. So I think I just think it’s it’s gonna be a showcase. It’s it’s gonna be very visible because it’s, you know, you get a lot of traffic many ways down there. The potential partnerships with the college and bringing kids over from the college and doing some things over there with maybe our program or maybe with their swimming, making a lot of doing swimming with the college, probably because the college doesn’t have a pool, we’ll bring the students over.
So I think it’ll be a a a facility that’s gonna be used by both youth, teens, college, adults. You know, the I mean, the biggest complaint that we’ve gotten over the years, the consistency. We don’t have the ability to do consistent programming, and now that’ll give us the ability to do consistent programming. So the exposure of this is just gonna be multiplied. So that’s that’s kind of a a a rendition of what the and you can kinda see the the the wall. It kinda goes up with the perforated thing and then, where the street was. There’s, you know, where the entryway and then the there’s a little blue marker down there, I think, where the plaza where I was talking about earlier and the wall. So that’s 1 of the architectural designs of all the files that hopefully, it’ll be very similar to this. I can’t I never looked at the design and say that’s the Oklahoma because it never ends up being that that way. But, we will build out the parking lot on the 1 side, because it will be a facility that will need parking on that.
And I think it’ll be like I said, the the pool concept, if you’re not familiar, we’re gonna be doing a, a a comp pool and then a training pool, for teaching lessons. As as we all know, we live on an island. As we all know in the recent months or recent weeks with the tornado and the tsunami watch, we all should know and have some. Right. Just saying I’ve been here a lot. I’ve just seen 2 big, warnings in the last 2 weeks. So, anyways, and then, you know, so I’m, I’m I’m being funny, but I’m not being funny. We all should learn how to swim at least be water safe. Mhmm. So, so That, AAC stands for the Island Aquatic Center.
I’m not sure exactly, if that’s gonna be the official title of it eventually. I know I mean, like, so who knows what’s gonna happen. But we’re we’re promoting, you know, bicycling, you know, as always in all of Alameda’s, projects, we’re promoting sustainability and having lots of places for bikes. The kids can just ride their bikes over during the summertime, which is the awesome. It’s right on a major thoroughfare with a bus line comes through. So I just it’s kinda landed south to really great exposure for public art. AMP is also trying to use the facility to do some showcasing of their 0 transmission, having a little wall and some and some placards talking about how you can solar and and, so solar thermal transmission, which it will be part of the how they heat the pool, which is not, cheap. But, you know, in the long run, that that that part cost is because you have to put in a little piping, but in the long run, we’ll save a lot of money, on how to keep because, obviously, keeping pools warm is is a major expense all the time. So, and then we’ll slash that with some fun there. Go ahead, Steve.
And you can see, the wall in the background. So that yes. So that’s that’s so the top part is solid. It was porous. That’s where the well, is that the, so that cut out the metal arc to go and basically just nicely incorporate the nature of the park and the aquatic Yeah. It could be yeah. It could be, doing showcasing aquatic things. It could be showcasing the nature around Jean Sweeny, which is is awesome too as well. There’s plenty of the canvas there. I forget.
I think it was a 100. I don’t wanna say a 100 and 12 feet, but of wall. It’s it’s it’s basically it surrounds the entire Yeah. The conda 1 on the on the side in the interior side of the park. And the the variation, it’ll be more fencing, less wall, and more fencing in certain spots, depending on the elevation. Because we do have to build this pull up. There was a wind study done. Yeah. And so that’s what’s going to be key. That’s what the wind study came back with, that we did 10 feet and then fought a book for a circus.
Mhmm. Good. So To protect and make it a little bit more nicer to be in the herd without the rain. As we’ve learned many times at Ensignal, which does not have a windfall or anything like that. It’s very can be very cold and windy over there. So this is you know, again, we’re we’re taking our learn lessons learned and and trying to put in a facility that’s gonna be, an asset for the city of Alameda for many years. And what you’re looking at is the 0 entry pool. So it’s a a walk in, and then it also has lapsed lanes. So it’s gonna be great for our little ones, also our seniors, water walking, all of that. So this is a true facility for all ages.
K. Yeah. And I will also point out that this facility will also be used, for emergency purposes. And because we’re gonna have locker rooms for showers and things like that, that that it’s there’s not many facilities on the island that do have emergency services. So that’s also another key component to this project itself. And and the fact that Alameda people like to swim. They like the water. So I wanna thank you guys for listening, and hopefully, as we proceed for the night, we get some support on this. And I look forward to hearing your presentation on your master plan. So thank you, guys.
Thank you. Okay. Do we have any, clarifying questions, commissioners? What is your timeline for the construction? Construction, will start until either summer of next year. K. So within the next 10 to 12 months, then. Yeah. The plan would be to hopefully be open in winter of 28. 28.
Okay. So you’re look you wouldn’t yeah. For January. That’s right. 28. Any any arth might be considered replacement on it would you’re looking at, you know, a 3 3 year need. I would think I would assume. I mean Well, we if if we were gonna need our we’d like to do it in conjunction with the development of the project so that when we open it up, we’re not adding the piece of this. No. My point was is that, it’s early.
Just wanna make sure that, you know, you don’t wanna go too early. You wanna put you wanna write you want your arc right at the end so it doesn’t, you know, be in the way of construction. So Really? Unless unless you’re doing something with that. Fencing Fencing. That’s construction. Right. Right. Right. Yeah.
But, yes, on the the standalone if you’re doing standalone pieces, absolutely. But it would be it would be nice to have it all coincide so we could have, you know, 1 day opening that showcase both the facility, public art, and the AMP demonstration. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. And that top of that would involve the PDF to a public art piece. So we would need to know if that part would be public art. It’ll depend on because it would basically get built as as the public art. Mhmm. You’re referring to this window.
Yeah. It’s not something you can build and then put the stuff on top of it. It actually has to get built as the art. Right. Well, you frame it then. Right. So I’m not sure you could do that, but it’s okay. I understand what you’re saying. You could frame in the entire upper windfall, and then you do the fill after. Right.
Yeah. That’s what I thought. Yeah. Next round. That’s how I put that tire. That’s what we Yeah. And, yeah. I know that they get some demonstrations at the presentation about different contraptions that you can get inside more. This is all yeah. This could all be really nicely done.
It’s beautiful, cluttered jet or laser work. Yeah. Really accentuated. Yeah. Very nicely. So any Yeah. They showed it. Questions. I’m sorry. Any more questions?
Yeah. Yeah. You’re getting ahead of yourself. We’re we’re doing clarifying questions right now. Yeah. Is there anything in the in the current budget for liquids available? No. Not at all? Is there any budget? Mhmm.
Will I think we’ll require a budget to have decorative elements. Some of the AM elements that are coming are gonna be negative too. So, you know, that’s what we’re working on right now. And then that’s why we’re having to to see what what opportunities we have. Okay. But the idea would be that the closure of the tenants would be completely financed. So I would probably. I would say I’d love that. Yes. Because that helps us, to spend money on the facility But yes.
That would that would be my my thought. So by now, this would be a $30,000,000 project. So if you would have a a public arts requirement, we would talk about $300,000. Yes. That is correct. That’s what the answer is. Okay. Good. Good. Good.
So my question is, will you then, be choosing your own artist for this, or are you incorporating us into the process? I I mean, the city department, I mean, I can’t speak for for my director, but I would assume that we’ll be working with the public art commission and Jackie and him have already discussed. And then we wanted probably Okay. Wanted this a truly collaborative project so that you guys can also again, the location lends itself and it also gives visibility Mhmm. To the public art, done correctly in in in the area, I think it would be awesome. So, yes, I’m the I think the intention is that we would work with you. I think the other thing is that this is a quality center that has Alameda has never had 1. All of our product centers currently that we share are in their seventies. This is a project that is going to service Alameda for the next 75 plus years. And so 1 of the biggest things is is in working with AM, in working building architect, this is truly it becomes the communities of what I’m saying.
It’s not just the reparations departments. It’s it’s truly for the community at the end of the day. Right? This is that’s why it’s called the Alameda, you know, a fire center. It’s not the recreation department. So in in in that is that this is the opportunity to show people what we can do with the whole electrical. And then that’s the 1 great part about this facility is it will be 1 of 4 currently all electric and fire centers in the this side of the coast. It is not it is not normal for aquatic centers to be electric, but city council, we also feel it’s very important for our climate action plan to go all electric. Tools and aquatic centers give a lot of lot of power and gas. And so this way, we are at the forefront of that.
So that’s another really big component of this is that moving completely sustainable? I I invited it to the 1 the library was first developed and how that was a, you know, sort of ID building and all the the cutting edge things that they did. Mhmm. That’s what this is gonna be. It’s gonna be a cutting edge. And in fact, people will be coming across the island to see this just like we went off the island to look at certain aquatic facilities in the area, to take the best components of those facilities. As Stacy said, and I applaud her passion. She’s very passionate about aquatics and been doing aquatics for an entire life. It’s I think it’ll just be an opportunity, as she stated that for us to all look back to this is a great community project that we all contributed to. And and it’ll help fill out also, I would also say on the on the more selfish side, as a recreator, it’ll also help fill out the James Lee footprint, to to be more because we’ve only developed as part of that part because if I’m in, it doesn’t need developing the second part of it and then there’s a third part that is also gonna give an opportunity in the middle, the middle of the these are the 2 ends, and then in the middle of the park is gonna be another, portion of open space that’s gonna be really nice.
And I think and also just access, community access like Liz was talking about. People will be able to walk through. Now now they kinda kinda cut through some of the certain places, but they’ll be able to go right to the shopping center over at Marina Village or come back to the park. The the, business park there. We’ll also be able to use the pool for last swimming for their employees to come over and and do lesson planning. All the people hopping at them will be coming to this thing, and that also gives another exposure about all to the public art. Right. Any other clarifying questions from the commissioners? I have some things to talk about, but they’re not questions, so to speak. Oh, yes.
I’ve looked, the first department in Madeline moving some of the 63 public apartments. When they moved, I mean, this 1? Mhmm. They were I think they were chosen because they were. And and the look we love about the pillars that with the whole white theme to them. They’re literally just that it’d be that wonderful, like, kinda entrance to into that park for everyone walking, biking in. So they’ll literally walk through those pillars. There’s a bike parking that you see is off to the, the right hand side. So that’s we we’re very excited about. I’m I’m quite thinking about the rocks there.
As soon as it happens, yes. Yes. I understand that right now, like, what I’m asking is, but does it park in the hatch? You will get some thoughts from that. I don’t think so. The amount of That would be time and effort that was put into those and especially working with the artist, then it I mean, I I I mean, I mean, we chose those spots because they were gonna be permanent. Okay. And and and that’s I mean, that’s I mean, I don’t down the road, I have no idea what’s gonna happen. It’s in breaks or something like that. But as of now, no, there’s no plan.
There’ll be any other public park in parks. Okay. Okay. We’re good. Any public comment? Lehi me double check it. We don’t hang on here. Okay. Oh, we do have Lisa on here, but I don’t see a comment from her. Okay.
You know, I’m gonna stop share real quick just to make sure I could see everything. Oh, wow. I just turned on the captions and it started Yes. I was like, how did it do that? Okay. Sorry. No public comment. Okay. So that’s the close of the public comment. Now we’re going to open it up to the Commissioner’s discussion and feedback.
So I’ll go first. It feels like, with this project, it needs to start sooner rather than later. And if we’re going to be involved, that involves a request for proposal. So that will be something it sounds like we might be adding into our schedule this year. So what about The RQ is is in the biannual work plan. Mhmm. Okay. Okay. Okay. But is that this is a new project.
I I thought it was Well, this is a site to consider, and then we’re going to get a presentation from Jack and a little bit here, which will go through all the sites and the aquatic park being 1 of the sites. And then there is, a request for the pack to select a site that we move forward with. Well, that sounds easy then. Okay. That’s a slam dunk then. Alright. Any other thoughts? Well, Pete oh, Mike, Peter, could you, yeah, expand on what you have. Okay. First of all, I love it.
Right? I have a 6 year old. There’s nothing to pressure between where I’m trying to spend an an opportunity for him to consume easily in the city. This makes it easier and something that the ability to do is really excited. And from a public arts perspective or an experience of action. The reason why is we already have 2 sculptures in in James Finney Park, which in my mind is at at the wrong space right now, and the public art and master plan is trying to kind of balance sculptures over the whole city. What we’re doing now is adding our cultures and safe space. We’re seeing cultures that certainly will see more people than we have ever seen, but still focusing on 1 area bound for some people. And while I understand that maybe specific sculptures for the for, through or for your body center, 1 of the leading lab that asked me if the arts arts the parks department think about moving other sculptures there in James Wing Park is about set out. And moving the sculpture is still cheaper to buy sculpture over.
The last winners, in my mind, from purely from a from a creative placemaking perspective, none of the sculptures that we have something to see are specifically for the city, maybe for the exception. So moving them to in in as as someone who does that professionally, if not, if you want. Next thing for me is the budget. It this will be a $30,000,000 project. You do want them. This is where we just left the hair. The $30,000,000 project, people talk about for a $300,000 if it will be based on our public arts requirement. $300,000 for the amount of stuff that we want here is not possible. No. We’re talking about a fence.
City of Oakland just had an RFP for a fence that went to the an RFP for a public part of the study. We’re talking about a $120,250,000 if, if you choose the length of the tanks without anything else. Then we’re having 1 1 wall piece or 2 wall pieces. If you compare that to the wall pieces that we put up on, to Main Street Mhmm. And we’re talking about $60,000 to reach the 7 number, which is very important. Then I see a sculpture in the front of the or at the entrance where I think the perfect place for it, which which is roughly 16 feet tall, so it’ll get this, this drawing, which is realistically a 200 and $1,000 culture if we’re if we’re talking about that height. And then we’re talking about an additional piece that that should become the big piece of the entrance. So right now, I’m seeing that that what we have as a budget isn’t enough to make this happen. I feel like as the arts commission, we can focus more on 2 of these. And I’d be totally happy to do this, but I would also like to figure out a way of of balancing this out for the rest of the city who is not as interested concerning which, they should be.
I Yeah. I totally know. But we’re talking about the part this morning to shipping or carry doing whatever. Right. Personally, the requirement that we can only do 1 sculpture every 2 years is 1 that they made up. I don’t see that we can change this. We have an idea what what finances are coming in over the next year, and they might make more sense if they give 2 larger, 2 larger infrastructure projects happening right now. It might be worth the 2 larger, you have 2 larger sculptures. My last point is, there was a discussion in the original model of public monster plan, to find additional ways of funding, but it should never really explore further. But I feel like it wired to me, it’s happening in a way that would actually be reasonable with to have a bunch of insight and make proper art.
But to me, this feels like we should need to explore our service to to have more public private partnerships and find ourselves to be. Can I can I say 1 thing? Yes. I was gonna say, those are just the 4th places where for opportunity. They’re necessarily using all 4 of them. And I would also say, you know, it doesn’t necessarily have to be sculpture. And that I mean, I’m leading that to your expertise. Right. Originally, the design of that, entryway was supposed to be a, a railroad trestle trestle. Mhmm.
Because it’s seamless. Right. So, again, it can be related to the Aquatics, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be also exposed to the human part. Again, totally understand exactly what you said, but I’m saying, I’m giving you opportunity. I’m not saying that this all you can do them all. I mean, that’s all you have. I lost you. Like, I could also see that, like, especially the bottom for me could also repeat that. These are the people who are seeing the validity and, like, the show or anything that really says, Rupert, we can show with our public art that are that are going to deal with our team. Oh, yeah.
Yeah. But But I think these are things that don’t have to happen right away. It’s a 4 year lead time for this. Maybe, you know, we do this every 2 year, you know, although we don’t wanna group up all the sculptures and all our art budget right here. So I appreciate what you’re saying about that. Well, that’s where I would and to be involved with. The the wind ball depends on the city to be part. Well, but that’s I have you talked to your you’re you’re gonna have you got a RFPs going out to the contractor down soon. We’ll go out with the RFP until, you say, it’s, like, March. Oh, okay.
Good. So you haven’t has it even been written? No. Okay. Well, why not ask with the included into the RFP, their version of an architectural for the wind wall? They most of these guys will put that in there, you know, they they won’t kill them, and they’ll be happy to put that in there if you ask for it and they can they come up with some interesting ideas that are outside of what we would need to do, and that gives everybody they would be it would be in their budget, not anybody else’s. And then that’s more room for the kind of art that we can do very well. Mhmm. So I because stuff like wind walls and that kind of stuff, companies are they’re they’re not artists. They’re just companies that knock that stuff out all the time.
You tell them what you want, say tell me what seagulls are going all the way across. They can every panel will have a block of seagulls going on. Yeah. You can make that stuff very easily. It’s all now down to seek CAD and, and wire jet ache or laser. Yeah. They’ll be and they’re beautiful, and they’ll do all they’ll do what you want. Yeah. It’s just like it. Good suggestion.
Thank you. Yep. Right. Commissioner Plattskover? Right. Good. Well, I wanna thank you again for this presentation. And I wanna say that I appreciate you working in those columns into the overall design. You know, when we put them there, we really didn’t know why we were putting them there. But you worked them in, and it’s they’re so appropriate for what is going on there.
And, I think this is a great opportunity for us to showcase some amazing art as long as we work out the details of budget, who does what, And, just keep us posted and let us know and, as you move forward. That would be awesome. Okay. Good. Thank you very much. Okay. And next, we’re going to, talk about some recommendations to review and select final art primary sites for future physical public art. And please grab some food quotes. Yes. Don’t be shy.
Don’t wanna have too many leftovers. Yeah. Right. We won’t. Yeah. Thank you. Hello? Hello? Make sure you introduce yourself. I will.
Yeah. Good evening chair and commissioners of the public art commission. My name is Jack Dunham Conrad. I’m the civics, public art fellow at the City of Alameda. Yeah. Thanks for having me here tonight. I’ll be sharing a little, kind of review background about some of the research I’ve done over the last, several months. But mostly this will be a kind of shorter informational presentation, recommending to the pack to select 3 primary signs for future physical public art that we can move forward on an RFP with in 20.5. So a little bit of background. The, this process began out of lessons learned from past public our RFPs where, artists were given the opportunity to choose locations that they wanted to put their physical art pieces, which led to many issues with engineering concerns and art on private property and right of ways and other kind of general feasibility issues.
And the new ish now, public art master plan describes a need to develop a process for identifying sites so which is exactly what this research did. It took criteria developed in the master plan to develop a methodology for scoring locations around the island. And those scores and suggestions from the commission have led to this meeting’s final selections as we move toward the RFQ in 2025. So this is the first time the city, and the commission have done a process like this. And through collaboration with PAC and staff, a lot of changes have been made along the way, as we know. And there could be changes made on route to future RFPs or RFQs. And we’re happy to answer questions on methodology, but again, we just hope that this meeting or this presentation focuses on selecting sites from this final list. So this timeline here is, mostly the research took place April to August of this year. 39 original sites selected by staff, or suggested by staff for the public art master plan were ranked using criteria from the plan. And the top 12 sites were put into a community input survey, taken by just over 300 people.
And that input was put back into the ranking spreadsheet as a score 1 through 10. Those results were then brought back to PAC in June. And PAC suggested revising the weighting of visibility criteria and adding, a few locations that community members had suggested in the community survey that didn’t originally get, into the spreadsheet. Additionally, city staff have added the Alameda Aquatic Center as a potential location in the site analysis, and that has all been completed. And here we are in December, quick informational presentation and a final selection of priority sites. So here’s a quick look at the criteria spreadsheet. This shows the criteria, visibility, geographic equity, accessibility, community input, environmental suitability, safety, and the top 12 locations with community input, and this is from the June meeting. So Pat’s suggestion was to increase the weight of the visibility as well as look at those new locations from the community survey. So here it is a little less busy, a little over the place. And these were the top 12 based on initial analysis and community input scores from the survey.
So here’s what the survey results looked like originally. From over 3 100 300 responses from the most popular, which was Main Street Ferry Terminal to Godfrey Park on Bay Farm. And then here is the map of the 45 community, but, localized suggestions. So it gave participants the ability to submit locations that were not in the top 12 that they were ranking. And among those locations were Neptune Park and the area around Park and Santa Clara intersection and several others on the island. Many of which were included in the spreadsheet and some that we could consider in future analysis processes. So of the 45 locations, the clustered locations were park street, Neptune Bay and Ballina Bay or Neptune Park and Ballina Bay. And they were considered in the community input criteria column per pack suggestion. They were given a 5 in that category, illustrating that they had some level of, significant community support. So ultimately, you’ll see 2 of those locations were included in the final list because of their combination of community support and, pack support and pack suggestion.
The park street in Santa Clara intersection and like up to the park at Webster gateway. So here’s just a quick visualization of how the, or here you can see the top 12 locations after this, visibility weighting change. Park in Santa Clara intersection and Neptune Park made its way into that top 12. And then just to see how the kind of, distribution changed, We have the quick kind of the light blue there is visibility. So it came from the, geographic equity shrank to give way to the importance of visibility here. And then next, we’ll see the the change from the initial June, top 12 and then the top 12 from the increased visibility. Okay. So the Alameda Aquatic Center is not in this top 12 because it was not included in our, community input survey. But it did receive the ones that did include in the Duane Clear Park and Santa Clara and Neptune, did receive considerable suggestions from community members. And so they’re included in the bridal 8 as well as the Alameda Applied Center.
And, so the, yeah, we’ve, we’ve talked a lot about this already. And I think we can understand some of the benefits. The, when the aquatic center site was added to the location scoring spreadsheet, it’s scored 12 out of 41 locations without incorporating any community input. So this ranking is primarily due to the high visibility ranking as the site is on, busy roads, walking and biking trails and future location of events and gatherings. Especially important though thinking back to Amanda Gertke’s presentation last pack meeting, about lessons learned and feedback that the aquatic center As an art location offers opportunities for cross departmental work and cost saving and things like, site preparation and engineering. So because of this top 12 ranking and these opportunities, sort of collaboration with cost saving, Staff is recommending the aquatic center be included in PACS top 3 locations for future public art. In that same vein, thinking about lessons learned from, from that earlier meeting, thinking about the difficulties of, public art on private property, and lessons learned surrounding, time and money and difficulty involved in putting putting art on public property. These are, having this this opportunity for departmental collaboration and, in the public park spaces. We’re we’re excited about this. Yeah.
So after this summary of the last few months of work, here are the final 8 locations. Those are the key takeaways from the product center. Here are the bridal 8 locations that staff is requesting pack choose, 3 to move forward with in the RFQ in 2025. So this list consists of the top 5 locations from the final criteria spreadsheet. 2 locations, Park Street and Neptune Park, which were in the top 12 of that ranking and received considerable input from PAC and the community and staff suggested Alameda Aquatic Center. So staff is asking that PAC, discuss and select 3 primary locations that ultimately, will be, vetted further and put into the 2025 product queue. Thank you. Thank you. Hey. Let’s, open up floor to clarifying questions.
Why free, locations? What’s gonna happen to create a home? So this is, I think, just to make, space for potential, complications in engineering or, like, site prep. If we have 3, we can kind of work through that without needing to, come back if there’s any, any, some meetings that have. The RFQ would would include all 3 of them. The RFQ is the We just 1 site. And so the department would essentially pick 1 out of the 3. Mhmm. For the question, No. You just asked that RFQ would say to the artist, there’s 3 spots.
Pick 1 of them. Is that what you’re saying? No. I was saying pick a 3. Right. You’re telling them 3 and they’re picking 1. Very difficult. Okay. Yeah. Hello?
Hey. So we suggest rate and out of that they pick. I wanna find understanding? Forgot. So what? So basically, it’s gonna boil down to that aquatic center because we have a 4 year turnaround time, you guys. I know. What I mean My is that correct? We’re at the end. Is that correct?
I’m just So let’s have well, no. I have to be careful. Oh, I Do you have any questions? Do you have any questions? Figure out a quest Yeah. Like jeopardy. I’m trying to phrase it in the form of a question. Question. That’s right. And you know, we won’t be able to discuss it.
Right. Right. Right. I’ll leave it alone. I’ll leave it alone. I’ll get to discussion, then I’m going to say something. Now when we do start discussing it, is there a map that shows just these locations on it? The map previously had a lot of locations, but not just these 8. No. Okay.
Okay. Okay. I I I’m gonna I’m gonna try 1 here. Okay. He going back if you could comment about this being a $30,000,000 project of which 1% goes to the the art. Right? Okay. Would go. Would go. Would go.
But is it my understanding that the contractor also has the right to do his own art? Correct. Public arts requirement that city has to not include public buildings. So in this context, there isn’t a requirement for public art. Okay. Thank you. It does include municipal buildings. It does. Like, even the firehouse, for example. Wait.
Wait. So the budget needs to have a public art budget? There there there needs to be a public art allocation for all development that is $250,000 or more, including municipal buildings. But then why does this need to come out of our budget? Because because the the request that the budget or or that they gave for the aquatic center was that they come out of the general public model. Like, this is not a general public. Well, I think that these we have a a double opportunity here. I think it’s about leveraging resources across the city, and so I understand that the budget for the aquatic park has gone in far leaps and beyond what they would like to consult. I’d like to make that decision. So I think that’s how the conversation started with us, was how are they going to fulfill their public art allocation for this site?
And so the conversation came to us. Justin Long reached out to us and said, we’re going to have this very large contribution. We’re already well beyond our initial specs of the budget. Can we work together to realize the public art allocation? So there’s not it’s not like it has to happen exactly like this, but I think it would be collaborative for the cities to work together for the departments. Yeah. But I I understand. Okay. Okay. I’m I’m I’m still in the now I’m having a whole bunch of questions.
So the city council voted that half of the aquatic park is paid via the public, via the general fund and the other half via the certificate, of participation. So the public arts fund is considered public, general fund in this context, because in my mind, this is in your market fund. I don’t believe it’s considered the I I think this is an allocation on top of what they’re already building. This is in addition to. So because it’s a it’s a development that is costing $250,000 or more, it automatically triggers the public art requirement. So the the dollar amounts and the budget that you’re talking about, which I’m not too familiar with, because I haven’t been so closely tied to the Aquatic Park development and the construction of it. But my understanding is that budget is separate from the public art allocation. Mhmm. Yep. So that gets us doubling it for our But if if it’s doubled, then it’s great.
I I feel like If we use that 1%, 300,000 If we’re giving and then we could have another opportunity to put other art Oh, I out of the file. I’d be totally fine about that, but that doesn’t feel like, I this is very confusing. I’ll say, like, I’m barely into slow here, and it would be nice to get a better idea about your And where the money is talking about. So that’s what we’ll we’ll try to figure out with that money. Right. As as for this, going back to this Yes. Back to this. Yes. I had a few additional questions. What makes the ferry terminal more safe than Washington Park?
The, the methodology around safety, I think was mostly with, the traffic. So the park is less safe because there’ll be less traffic. And then, that room is very low. It was, I think surrounding the the surrounding Washington Square Park has, yeah, worse traffic safety ratings than the Okay. And then why does the aquatic center in that case gets 10 points in the yard? The the streets around us are pretty. The Nyanix. Sorry. It’s not even It’s not in here? It’s a final analysis.
Yeah. I think that was I think it’s taken directly from the traffic data, but I, I can look into that also. But it ultimately, it’s the it it’s the the staff. It’s it’s not in the top 12, like Okay. So the the it’s it’s, favorable. Okay. So you see here is lehi last thing. Mainly for traffic. Yeah. Okay.
Okay. Yeah. I think that’s in the the descriptions of what went into each, or each criteria is in the in the staffing team. Okay. Good. Yeah. I’m more quick. No. That’s good. Okay.
How about public comment? Do we have any public comment on this subject? Really quickly to see if we have anything. Q and a. No. K. Okay. So, that closes the public comment. Commissioners, discussion and feedback. So, Well, it’s an it’s another and I keep going back with you because I I know you better better versed in this, but I it’s but again, my understanding that if a contractor is awarded the contract of which that of 1% is for public art he can choose to do his own art and put it there in lieu of a payment to the public arts commission that because that puts you in kind of a gray area well I’ll yeah I’m sorry I’ll correct this is this that because you’re at you know if we pick say we pick that that site gets picked by the city the quiet part but then the guy says well I’m gonna build my own I’m gonna put my own art there and I’ll satisfy my own report which does happen but The developer is the city.
Uh-huh. Yeah. The developer is the city. So the developer is the city And so they are looking at that. Gonna give the yeah. But the contractor’s the 1, not the developer. Isn’t that the who ultimately takes in the money for the public car? The developer. And in this case, it is Alameda Wrecking Park. But it’s the city paying It is money.
Money. So the money’s coming from the city. And all of them okay. What so what I’m not entirely sure with with this whole discussion is if this is going to be the same thing that we had a few months ago, where the city would like to spend money but hopes that they can use the public art funds for it? Or if if what we’re doing is adding money on top of of funds that the city has already allocated in the the construction of To me, it seems really clear. It’s a city project. They’re gonna use that 300,000 to create art. We have the opportunity to add more art on top of that as part of our next I’m not entirely certain it’s on top of. I believe that it’s the final pencil is gonna be the final dollar amount is all relative to the construction costs and the permits, Right. Which right now, we have ideas about what that looks like.
And it does look like it might be a $300,000 allocation, could be more. Yeah. So I’m just using that number as Right. Right. But essentially essentially, this, they I think the way that it will pencil, we we have to that remains to be seen. Because they could be, you know, like Pat said, they could be saying it would be wonderful if we could fulfill the entire allocation, utilizing funds from the public art fund. But simultaneously, if that’s something that we want to discuss further, what that looks like, whether it’s a 100%, whether it’s 50, or whatever percentage it might be, that remains to be seen. But ultimately, the purpose of Jack’s presentation today is to identify the site. And then we can dedicate more time to the discussion of how it is paid. And so I just want I don’t want to get true caught up in the weeds True.
About payments and things because as you know, this project has not been realized yet. It needs a lot more time, and so there’s much more discussion to be had. But I think the fact that it is brand new construction presents a lot of cost sharing. So ARPD, for example, can say, hey, we’re going to prepare the site. We’ll cover the costs of the say they just say that it ends up being a sculpture at the plaza, kind of like Pat said, it could potentially be. We don’t know yet. But say that it is that, they can set the pad up for it, and they can eat those costs, and take care of those costs. So that the dollar amount is really for the art itself, as opposed to preparation costs, which we understand can be tens of 1,000 of dollars. And so that’s where we talk about a cost savings through having interdepartmental, sharing of resources. And I don’t want that to be lost today, on getting caught in the weeds about money that has yet to be seen in dollar amounts that we don’t know just yet.
I agree. You know, and I totally agree. And I think that what’s really important for us right now is to focus on these 3 sites. I know we have questions swirling around it, but let’s pick these 3 sites and move it forward, because we are limited on time and we have to make some decisions and move all our projects and things forward. Yeah. I mean, my my 1 comment would be that we should include Lisa’s, comments. Yes. Comments. Which we can bring those up too. Yeah.
Yeah. Like, I can pull them up right now unless there are further clarification questions or discussion questions you wanna get to. No. I haven’t signed with it. I haven’t. Wrong. Sorry. 1 second. I have to stop sharing this. And so, commissioner, Lisa Martin was not able to attend the meeting today, so she provided she provided us comments.
And so I’ll go ahead and pull those up so we can read them. As I said 1 second. Yes. Okay. Great. Let me go ahead and share the screen so everyone can see the comments. And if you want, Commissioner Rush, I can read them out loud if we want to, or because everyone received a copy already, but members of the public may have not seen it yet. It is attached to the agenda, but if you didn’t download the most recent agenda from earlier this, afternoon, you wouldn’t have seen it yet. So if you’d like, I can go ahead and read it out loud. I I think that might be a good idea.
Hi, Jackie, Dwayne, and Jenny. I hope you’re all having a good day. I would like to provide some thoughts. Oops. I’m gonna scoot this out of the way. Thoughts and questions on agenda item 2024, 4639, recommendations to review and select final primary sites for future public art, since I will unfortunately be unable to attend the meeting. Please see below. Oops. Of the 8 sites under consideration as potential sites for new public physical artwork, I support the selection of the Main Street Ferry Terminal, the area being described as Neptune Park, and the proposed Alameda Aquatic Center. The Main Street Ferry Terminal is an area that sees a lot of foot traffic from both Alameda residents and visitors from off island.
Its function as a gateway makes it a natural location for public artwork. In addition, the immediate area is relatively, quote, unquote, rough and underdeveloped, which opens up the possibility for many types of artistic intervention. Neptune Park, the grassy triangle between Webster Street and Constitution as you enter and exit the tubes, is currently quite visibly visually unimpressive. A large empty expanse of grass with some trees and Canada geese. Like the ferry terminal, it is a gateway to the island and therefore a natural location for public art. It is also sandwiched between 2 busy roadways and right next to housing. All this adds up to a very challenging location for an artist to develop a suitable proposal, but the quote unquote payoff for the city would be large in such a high visibility spot. It would be important to include the neighboring residents in the design and planning phases of any artwork at this location. The Alameda Aquatic Center presents an opportunity to integrate public artwork into the early stages of design and construction of a new community space. This is an exciting opportunity, and I can understand why city staff had desired to add this site to the list even at this late juncture in the site selection process.
I would like to hear more about whether the timeline for the Alameda Aquatic Center aligns well with the timeline for the public art commissions are a few process. Since the aquatic park is still in a public input and redesign phase, this is difficult for me to assess. The roundabouts are potentially interesting sites for artwork, but I do feel I don’t feel I can support them due to the concerns about visibility and traffic safety. Oops. Let’s go to bed forward. Sorry. Visibility and traffic safety, that that that exports that address these concerns satisfactorily, I certainly be would be open to revisiting them as options in future. The remaining sites are already heavily used by the community, which many existing activities with many existing activities, areas and gathering areas. Introducing public art in these spaces, I believe, better accomplished through arts and culture programming, rather than the addition of permanent physical artwork. Thanks.
Lisa Martin. That’s great. Very good. Any other I do have 1 more question. Mainstream fairy terminal, who’s the owner? I’m not sure. Question. I don’t know who the owner is for that. But that’s It’s basically or the city. Is it Is it emergency?
Yeah. I think it might be Lita. Lita. So would be would be Houston artwork to another agency? Or I’m not sure. We’d have to look into we’d have to look into that. I mean, it would have to be a collaborative effort because we’re not developing anything on their land without them knowing about it. So So you’re asking this just to clarify where the money if if there’s extra money going to that or It’s just that it’s gonna be a discussion last time that we should specifically look to book to book art in place and the whole discussion about the the location selection was that it should be, places that are owned by the city of Miami that makes the mix, that makes our life easier. And now the first, the first place in the the case in selection might be 1 that doesn’t but doesn’t fit the the. We’ll have to look into it.
I am not sure who owns this the ferry terminal. Yeah. But I do know that WIDA has some role in it because that’s their that’s their forte, the ferry system. So I’ll have to look into that. And it it But but even if it doesn’t, if if we don’t 100% own that piece of land for the ferry, what would be the downside to putting art there though? Here’s what I think. Like, if if you’re starting the discussion, mainstream ferry terminal will be very high on my list. Mhmm. However, I’m really not informed about splitting a sculpture in the parking, we’ve searched the other things that’s gonna happen. If if you do that, then my earnings.
Like, that that has 0 creative placemaking. There’s just nothing else to another marker on the street, on the side of the street. While, especially there, it feels like you could really use an art piece either to add more than it, to match the safety or or or more of a directional input into the whole thing. Or we we use something to increase the building, or to to lehi to the to the visual of the building. We both would would would require much more more distinct discussion with the owner, which in this case might be more complicated. And Sure. Doesn’t mean that I’m against. I’m just is saying that would be my True. That I don’t know if you can see it. Excuse me?
As long as we can see it. You know, I can but like putting another sculpture in another parking lot, but I feel like Well, I mean, is it in the parking lot? Or is it on the shoreline? Or is it, you know, we haven’t really on the building. It remains to be seen. We don’t have it. I think we just pick pick a spot, and then we dig down into it and have some alternatives. Which is why the alternatives are there. Sorry. I think that’s probably really I mean, I mean, to make it very easy, like, my suggestion would also be a miniature fairy turmer, and then Washington Park because it’s what what people were asking for.
And then and then, that believe it gets back and above, so it’s still a little bit of parking signage here. Just straight it up. Mhmm. The, you know, client center is very high in my list. However, if, if we’re actually talking about the building 2027, then I would rather prefer to figure out how this is going to work and and have, either update our biannual working plan accordingly or, or figure it out, within the the 20 27 round. But I I feel like focusing on the UI center right now while they are not half as far as we would hope they are, while you can already build the sculpture in the area that really needs 1. I I agree. My my hope would be, yes, who who will support them with this, but right now we’re starting something else. Right. And with the aquatic center, there are 4 years, but we do have to get our foot in that door early.
Yes. So that has to happen. We know there’s 1% going to the aquatic center for artwork. So why don’t we focus our energy on another spot for now? That’s true. If the requirement is there, then the planning needs to happen anyway. Exactly. So so okay. But what if we okay. We’re supposed to pick 3.
Right? Yeah. Is that correct? Correct. What if we tonight, if we decide not to pick the aquatic center as part of the 3, doesn’t it just mean that the city will override it and pick that anyway? I mean, I’m just being honest here. Isn’t that really what they can do? Sure. If council wants to do something, they can supersede, you know, the the PAC, the Public, Arts Commission is an advisory committee to council. Right.
So council will have can have, like, they can override a decision if they want to. No, that’s not what we’re saying is going to happen, but that’s just get that’s just the power and authority of the of the council. Got that. Yeah. But I’m not saying that that’s what’s going to happen. I didn’t no. I didn’t either, but I’m saying this is we we were just explaining this, oh, by the way, you can pick 3, but they’re gonna pick 1. And if they decide it isn’t 1 of our 3, there’s nothing more than they do about. But but that doesn’t that doesn’t matter. I think we need to really focus on what our suggestion is.
The city will do what the city does, but let’s make an a suggestion right now, so we can move this forward and not have to come back to all of this. Listen, Taylor. And I think you need to look at it as an advice. Like, my advice would be, right now, mainstream territory needs 1. This is an area that that gets more and more, people. We have a lot of arts organization right around it that I would love to to kinda hand something over that feels like it it fits in the the the darkening place of going to all these different events in this area. Mhmm. To me, that would make a lot of sense right now, and the aquatic center certainly had on my list. But, the aquatic center doesn’t feel like we’re at the point that selecting 1 in 2025 would actually it doesn’t need to be there, man. I mean, we could we could have a sculpture by the end of 2025.
Oh, really? But early 2020. Yes. That’s a is it make it 1 of those. Right. Right. So how shall we do this? Each commissioner just going to give its their their 3 recommendations? I I think that’s all we can do. And then when it’s well, they will have to and then hold on.
I guess it’s a little way along. Mhmm. I mean, I I would think the process has to be we unless we all agree on the same 3 and then it’s all. Well, let’s let’s let’s discuss it. Okay. So I, for once, say, the Main Street Ferry Terminal. Anybody else there? I think they all agree. Okay. Well, you guys got me on that 1 anyway.
Okay. We got that 1. Okay. That’s 1. Alright. 1. 2nd? You had mentioned Washington Park? I yeah. I I don’t mind so much, but that was what what the the the people on it.
The public wanted. Mhmm. Okay. Yeah. I was more of a Neptune Park person, but, And I was more of a 4th and central roundabout guy. Okay. Is that well, that’s that I I figured the 3rd loop would be the most contentious. Maybe if we can get to 2, then we can make it then we could really go at it to 3. Let’s get our team. Okay.
I am willing to go with Washington Park. The people have spoken, and I would suggest I’m glad I requested that, but Lisa also said Napkin Park. She did. But she’s technically not voting. But I guess So it’s just a reminder that her comments do not constitute a vote. Okay. So Washington Park, I believe, is, at biocultural. 2. Yeah. We’re down.
That’s we’re down 2. Okay. Here we are. Now we go. Okay. Battle Royale. I I okay. I’ll go first because I’m probably in the minority. I love roundabouts. And I love art on roundabouts.
I mean, I think there’s no binding. There’s a roundabout in this town. I love them, and they’re always great. And I’m and and everybody’s, well, yeah, but you’ll be distracted, and some of the bad will happen. Nobody can get to it. You know, it’s yes, maybe. But it’s something that’s beautiful that can be right in the middle of it. You can see it from all sides. It’s it’s when you come upon it and you’re what do I want? A big dimple there?
No. Can you show me where this exactly is? I think Central? It’s out this way. Right? It’s Yeah. Let me stop. You know the central and incident? I don’t care. I’ll go with me for 1.
What? Yeah. And I’d rather the central and incident. I mean Okay. So 2. It’s Avenue. Right? 4th Avenue and Central Ave. Is that where the gas station is? Yeah.
We’re in 4th Street and 4th Street and Central Ave. Okay. Of course. It’s starting to freeze. Oh, yeah. They’re cool. They don’t get it. It’ll it’ll make sense. It’ll go, oh, I know what you’re talking about. Yeah.
That’s Oh, they Let me Yes. Okay. I’ll also share the screen so that folks that are tuned in can follow along. So that’s really neat. Near the school, the school’s over there. I like the other 1. Do you have a location? Yeah. Anyway, the the other 1 the other 1 I don’t include actually. Is that right?
I’ll go either 1. I don’t I don’t have a preference. I just and you grab about some good 1 in my mouth. Well, the other 1 isn’t necessarily a I still don’t understand, but it’s it’s not really a harm to god. Okay. It’s not rep It’s it’s a DI or what’s the It’s it’s part of a, I I was in conversations in the original suggestion with, building planning. There’s I think they’ve described it as a roundabout project. Oh. I don’t I don’t know if it’s the Are we referring to sorry. Just to make sure that the other 1 here.
It’s becoming a it’s part of the, Can you tell me the location so I can show folks to Zoom in? Special incident. Is that what you’re talking about? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I’ll go back. It’s a little more tight here. Right? Yeah.
Yeah. I’m not really sure where that account about this. Right. Yeah. Mhmm. And this No. It’s not a true 1. I I don’t know. My enthusiasm went. Well, both of these both of these don’t Right.
Both of these are the sessions don’t currently have. Okay. They’re they’re for general. So they’re future roundabout. Yeah. So Okay. Alright. Well, then I’ll stick to my deadline because I know what term. Okay. They’re great.
That’s all I know. I think 1 is kinda more in the center of the house. Yes. Yeah. That’s what is the cross street? It is, Sherwood. That’s where I thought it was. That’s well, then center. Sherman. Yep.
It’s like it’s a 3. This 1 here? Yeah. And this is also a soon to be roundabout. Okay. But it’s not currently a roundabout. Oh, I see it. But this is not 1 you had chosen. These are both of these are Both of these. Okay.
These are on the top 8? So just to clarify, both of these roundabouts are on the top 8. As well as you. We have a fan of roundabouts. Here. I’m sorry. Roundabouts are great. If I can say if I build an office, that’s where I want it. Okay. Okay.
I’d be fine for what I mean being a roundabout. So we have that well, like I said, it doesn’t really matter. Yeah. We will have to get clarification on the construction timeline. Okay. Yeah. Part of the central avenue, which has been in development for the last 10 years. So We would need to talk with public work You don’t think I sent out to clarify. Man, I don’t wanna plop them. I wanna put, but, you know, the last Yeah.
Let’s not put let’s put it in in a spot where we know that we could actually use that spot. Okay. No. That’s fair. And it won’t take 10 years to get it there. Yeah. I’m not I’m not trying to So let’s go back to our list and see where we are. Back to the list. To the list. We got 2.
Come on back. Alright. We got 2 so far. We just need a 3rd. The question is, have we decided we’re not going to put the Aquatic Center on it, simply because it will be there for us to decide on within the next 4 years? Are we not saying that 1? I mean, I feel like 2025 is too early for for the product segment. That that’s all. Like, I’m I agree. Totally think it makes sense to you this, but in all reality, between between, delays in the in the and already existing schedules.
I would expect this to be a better project for for 2026. Let’s push it down the road a little. So let’s not do the aquatic center in there on our list of 3. Okay, you guys? Like, why besides that, like, if the aquatic center would come, then there will be a public art requirements and there will be some kind of discussion. So we don’t have to put it on this plan. And I still think we could change the biannual plan if it doesn’t have to pay. You know, I’m gonna vote for, Neptune Park. I’m going with Neptune Park. Neptune Park.
Neptune Park. No. No. I I you you read my as soon as you said that, I think. We have 3 locations. Okay. Do I need to ask everybody to ratify and we’ll satisfy? I think it’s just a just a Okay. So do I have a, what’s the terminology? What do you want?
Oh, you want to make a motion? Yeah. Make a motion. I motion that we accept 3, sites for, development for public art. Encarned. Okay. So, we have decided that Main Street Ferry Terminal, Washington Park, and Neptune Park are our choice choices. I’ve heard this. Good. Yay.
Alright. Let’s just say Aquatic’s film. Oh, I’m still in favor of the postcode in front of you know what they’re gonna do. Yeah. Well, that you know, it’s kinda happening to me. Well, let’s just wait. Let’s just wait and see them. There’s still in the room. No. My eyes go.
Okay. I guess, Lisa. K. Last but not least, the recommendation to accept the revised public art biannual work plan? So there’s no presentation for this. It’s just 2 additions that were made to the biannual work plan that was presented during our last meeting in October. Commissioner Plattsburgh had requested 2 additions. Number 1 being adding a post mortem process to the RFQ process. Mhmm. That would be a discussion amongst the pack members, and also an email to applicants to get their feedback on the application process.
And then the other piece of it was adding bylaws, which we don’t currently have. And so what we would do essentially is, crib some borrow some bylaws from some of our other commissions, and then sort of modify them to reflect the pack, and then we could get them approved. So those 2 things have been added to the biennial work plan. Okay. So the recommendation is to accept. So hopefully, you all had a chance to review, the plan. Totally. We’ll never know we accept it. That’s an excellent plan. Alright.
Do we have a second? I second that. All those in favor? I Alright. That’s it. Great. Nice job. That’s a quick 1. Moving forward. You wanna say something about the the the the discussion that we had about budget information.
Oh, no. That’s in that’s my staff communication next. Yes. Does staff have any other items to communicate to the commission? I do. So we actually had a recent program allocation from the Pennzoil site. Mhmm. And we have a new balance of 1 point so $1,310,307.13 is our current balance of the public art fund. And the most recent contribution was $320,000 sorry, $320,314 for the, Pennzoil site. It’s an in lieu fee that was contributed to the public art fund.
So that’s exciting. Basically, it grew by a little over 300,000. Awesome. So yay. Wonderful. Awesome. Additionally, another update is Storehouse Lofts, which is On The Point, has, delivered a they they they intend to deliver on-site art valued at a $150,000, and that will be, that Alameda Point redevelopors is the developer for this. Mhmm. They will submit a complete on-site art application, and, the developer and city staff shall present the proposed artwork to the public art commission at its regularly scheduled public meeting on May 19, 2025. Mhmm.
So right now, we have the allocation, essentially they’re going to they’re going to submit their plan, and then the PAC will review it. So we don’t have any plans yet, but it’s coming. So this is essentially So that’s on the radar. To take care of their own art. They’re delivering their own art, but they as per the requirement they are required to submit the, proposal to the PAC for review. So that’s coming in May next year. And 1 more piece, I am working closely with Walker to get an update on this spreadsheet that you all were given in the past. I don’t currently have access to that, so I’m working with him to get a copy of that. So I can give you regular updates at our next upcoming meetings. Fantastic.
So, oh, and 1 more thing. We did receive feedback from the public, that the PAC meetings are difficult to hear. So IT did another install of a microphone. And so everything should be good now. But, just wanted to give you a heads up that we were working to get that ironed out, because I guess the last 1 wasn’t working. So, all right. That’s my update. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay. Any do we have any written communications? No. Nothing new written. No. And I don’t currently see any q and a on here either. Nope. Okay. Are there any commissioner communications? The what’s Non agenda.
Non agenda. Yes. 1 1 comment for the, I was mentioning that in our preparation meeting that I would like to suggest to developers to come to us earlier than than they are required to discuss their art. Mhmm. I would still keep this as an open invitation and would hope this goes to this developer. That’s 1 thing. And then the other thing is I had a lovely time with my son at mister bubble whatever. Oh, it was a fun year ending. Do you have anything bubble? Yeah.
It was it was totally worth it. I Really? Awesome. You will all find grandchildren or nephews or nieces for next time in both of these. We’ll do it again. Awesome. That’s good to hear. Fantastic. The bar tonight? Okay.
I put it down. I got 2 grand. Right. Anything else, anyone? No. Let’s see. Are there any, oral communications? Anything from us? No. Nothing.
Okay. Well, I would like to say that it’s been a, interesting year in the public arts here in Alabama. We have some new commissioners, and I’m looking forward to 2025, and I want all of you to have a fabulous holiday. Oh, great. Thanks. Same to you. Thank you. Thank you. Great to hear to you all. Yes.
Thank you. Okay. If there’s nothing else, this meeting is now adjourned at 7:30 pm. All right. Woo hoo. Thank you.