HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-08-093 - Public Art Policy1
R ''
Community Services
Report To: Community Services Committee
Date of Meeting: December 1, 2008
Submitted By: Mark Hildebrand, Director, Programs and Services (ext. 2687)
Prepared By: Cheryl York, Arts/Culture Coordinator (ext. 3381)
Wards) Involved: All
Date of Report: November 10, 2008
Report No.: CSD-08-093
Subject: Public Art Policy
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public Art Policy be approved, replacing Policies I-285 Public Art Collection
Management Policy; I-340 Guidelines for Art/Artifact and Management Policy; I-485
Public Art Policy; and I-650 Percent for Art Policy.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Public art works located at Kitchener's civic buildings and prominent downtown public spaces
have become a distinguishing tradition in our community. Among Canadian municipalities,
Kitchener is a public art leader for its size.
Since 1995, a series of policies have provided support and guidance for the city's public art
program. Over time, the policies covered a range of programming including percent-for-art
projects, artist-in-residence commissions, donations, direct purchases, and industrial artifacts.
Replacing the above-noted documents with one policy reflects the results of the public art policy
and program review. The review was completed in November 2008 by consulting firm The
Planning Partnership. Those results support the need to clarify the public art program goals;
streamline the one percent funding mechanism; build on the strengths of the program; eliminate
duplication; and separate the various programs in the arts and culture unit for more efficient and
effective management. Both the artist-in-residence collection of art works and the industrial
artifacts collection of machinery and their related programming will be treated as distinct issues
when operational reviews occur in 2009.
In building on existing program strengths, the Public Art Policy re-affirms goals, fine-tunes the
scope, and provides directives for fair and open public processes and regular maintenance of
the growing collection. In addition, it identifies the need for a public art master plan to ensure the
best use of program funding based on agreed criteria. The master plan, subject to Council
approval, would be developed in 2009.
Report No. CSD-08-093 Page 2
The one percent funding mechanism remains in place as an allocation from those civic
construction budgets exceeding $100,000. The allocations are brought together in a
consolidated public art capital account to implement the program.
Through this pooled account, every civic construction project contributing to the allocation would
be eligible for a minimum $10,000-level public art project. Formerly, a construction project
valued at $300,000 would generate a $3,000 allocation for example. This amount is insufficient
support for a public art project.
The consolidated account would enable a choice of options for public art projects:
(a) public art projects implemented in tandem with the generating construction projects at
reasonable budgets;
(b) temporary installation projects such as digital projections on the Berlin Tower; and
(c) promotion of the collection and public education.
Formerly, outside agencies receiving grants/loans were encouraged to participate in the one
percent for art program. The policy refines a directive relating to public art in construction
projects for which the City provides grants or loans over $100,000. Recipients would be required
under the terms of the loan or grant to participate in the program up to the $300,000 maximum
allocation.
This report seeks approval for a new public art policy. Staff will focus on additional elements of
the public art program in 2009 and seek Council approval for future recommendations pertinent
to: a public art master plan; collection management guidelines; and, an analysis of options for
private sector participation.
BACKGROUND:
Community Services Department made a commitment to review its arts and culture programs in
response to recommendations 6, 8, 10, 32, 49, and 50 in Culture Plan II (2005). A review was
intended to evaluate programs for their efficiency and effectiveness. The first to be reviewed is
the public art program and its governing policies:
^ Public Art Collection Management Policy (1998, amended 2002)
^ Percent for Art Policy (2001, amended 2004)
^ Public Art Policy (2003)
^ Public Art and Acquisitions Trust Fund (2003)
^ Art, Artifact Acquisition and Management Policy (1995, amended 2004)
The five current policies exhibit overlaps and discrepancies. In addition, three distinct programs
are governed by the policies: public art, artist-in-residence, and industrial artifacts. The review
and its report deal with the public art program only.
An Expression of Interest document was advertised in May 2008. The consulting firm The
Planning Partnership was awarded the contract to undertake the review.
The scope of the review included assessment of current policies, program administration, the
public art collection, the development of a vision for public art in Kitchener, and
2
Report No. CSD-08-093 Page 3
recommendations for policy consolidation, funding options, partnership development and more
effective management of the program.
The Planning Partnership conducted its study as follows:
• Working sessions with steering committee and stakeholders -July 17, Sept 4
• Individual interviews with stakeholders
• Assessment of current documents
• Best practices research
• Town hall meeting -Sept 11
REPORT:
The Planning Partnership's study identified key issues, challenges and opportunities, and
assessed the collection.
Issues and Challenges
• Disconnected policies, overlaps, multiple definitions
• No long-term vision
• Establishing methods for capturing and maximizing opportunities for public art
• Lack of clarity in the administration process
• Funding/program sustainability
• Technical troubleshooting
• Attracting and retaining advisory committee membership
• Development of partnership opportunities
Opportunities
From the issues, several opportunities emerged:
• Development of long-term vision that sets principles and priorities
• Ongoing Official Plan Review process provides opportunity to strengthen public art
policy and priorities -need to embed public art into all policy layers
• Consolidation of policies provides a stronger implementation basis
• Build on the current strengths of the program
• Percent allocation at 1% and a pooled fund would allow flexibility in the use of the
percent for art funding mechanism to include priority projects. A master plan would
identify preferred sites and themes.
• Enhance public awareness about the public art program and initiatives
• Explore new partnership opportunities with community partners
• Develop an ongoing maintenance plan for the collection
Toward a Vision
Stakeholder and public consultation resulted in steps towards a vision for Kitchener's public art.
People want
• Beautiful, well-designed public spaces
• Identification of Kitchener as an exciting creative city
• A panorama of inspirational art works for citizens to enjoy
• Vibrant public spaces where people want to meet and spend time
A draft vision statement has been developed:
• Kitchener is a vibrant community where the best forms of public art explore our diversity,
tell our stories, and welcome artists to use creativity and imagination to make unique
landmarks and beautiful gathering places.
3
Report No. CSD-08-093 Page 4
Assessment of the Collection
Kitchener's current public art collection consists of 34 artworks acquired in three ways: (1) the
percent for art program, (2) donations, and (3) Artist-in-Residence program. Artist-in-residence
acquisitions are direct commissions to the current year's artist-in-residence, funded by the
Public Art Acquisition Trust Fund. While the review looked at all collected works, the proposed
policy document is focused on art works collected through the percent-for-art mechanism only.
Percent-for-Art Collection
Since 1993, with the acquisition of "Horsepower" and its installation at the Duke Street entrance
to City Hall, 15 additional artworks have come to the collection through competition processes.
Locations include, Victoria Park; Country Hills, Forest Heights, Stanley Park, Chandler Mowat,
Victoria Hills and Downtown Community Centres; Kitchener Market; Kitchener Memorial
Auditorium Complex; and, Activa Sportsplex (nine neighbourhoods). Materials span a broad
range from cast cement to stainless steel, depending on interior or exterior sites. Again, many
local artists are represented in this collection.
Donations
The bronze "Queen Victoria" by Raffaele Zaccaquini was unveiled in May 1911, on Victoria Day
in the tenth year after her death. The Princess of Wales Chapter of the IODE raised the $6,000
needed forthe monument.
In 1998, a pair of cast cement figurative sculptures, created circa 1938 by Helen Waimel
Robertson and now known as the Bullas sculptures, was donated to the City. The works once
graced a fountain in front of a local business owned by Mr. Bullas. They are the only mid-20t"
century works in the City's collection.
In 2005, Kitchener Professional Fire Fighters Association donated a bronze by Tim Schmaltz for
installation in Civic Centre Park. "Protecting the Memory" and "Queen Victoria" are both
commemorative sculptures.
From all sources, on average, two new artworks have been acquired annually.
Character of the Collection
The collection reflects the municipal principles of inclusion, diversity, accountability and fair
process, and community engagement. Many local artists are represented in the collection, and
the majority of works were acquired through public processes with modest budgets. Therefore,
the collection is broadly representative rather than specific or specialized, and, as with any
public competitive process, choices are constrained by the availability and quality of the
competitors' proposals.
Storage and Maintenance
Two works are currently stored: one set of photographs; and the Bullas sculptures. The pair of
sculptures will be restored within the next three years with a potential permanent installation in
an indoor location downtown.
There is no dedicated, secure and climate-controlled storage for public art at the present time.
Exhibitions of work (indoors) are therefore permanent, rather than temporary.
The City has not yet established a routine maintenance plan, although when works are in need
of attention, conservation is undertaken through contracts.
4
Report No. CSD-08-093 Page 5
Prospects for Growth
The percent-for-art collection will grow with a new municipal operations facility, a 400-space
downtown parking garage, two new community centres in the planning stages, and other civic
projects identified in the capital budget forecast (2008 - 2017). Other opportunities for growth
include streetscaping projects and parks/open space developments. Current staff resources
manage, on average, two percent-for-art projects annually.
Developments in the artistic quality of the collection will benefit from proposals generated by
artists with more experience and knowledge of public art-making methods and techniques. The
development of a national and international roster of artists, in response to a public call, would
assist the program through identifying artists with experience in more technically-challenging
projects.
Ensuring that RFP's for construction projects include information about the public art
requirement will assist project sponsors, managers and consultants with planning for public art
opportunities in the early design of facilities, and thus offering artists design opportunities that
are not possible once actual construction has begun.
Improvements in program management require a strong, well-informed project team and jury.
In addition, keeping Council and other community stakeholders engaged in the process is
important. The City should develop a collection management strategy in conjunction with a
master plan process to identify future directions.
Master Plan and Consolidated Capital Management
The development of a master plan for public art in Kitchener is seen as the next important step
in strengthening the program. A master plan will establish priority projects based on criteria such
as:
^ public accessibility and visibility
^ the linking of neighbourhoods
^ enhancements of landmark areas either natural or man-made
^ downtown development strategies
^ the distribution of projects across all wards
^ civic construction projects identified in the 2009 - 2017 capital budget forecast.
The master plan will also consider sustainability of the program and the best methods for
ensuring that sustainability. The plan will cover aten-year period.
The pooling of percent-for-art allocations into one capital account from eligible projects will
support a planned approach to delivery of the program. Such an approach will allow public art
project budgets to be developed to serve the needs of the master plan and its priorities as well
as service the sites whose construction budgets generated the funds. This refinement promotes
flexibility and best use of funds:
^ public art projects are implemented at civic sites identified in the 2008-2017 capital
budget forecast
^ temporary installation projects such as digital projections on the Berlin Tower are
supported
^ promotion of the collection and public education are supported
^ master plan priorities are supported.
5
Report No. CSD-08-093 Page 6
Public art budgets would be developed as follows:
^ Civic construction projects contributing to the consolidated capital account are eligible for
a public art project:
^ Projects that generate less than $10,000 (e.g. one percent of a capital budget less than
$1 million) are supplemented from the consolidated account to the $10,000 level for any
one public art project
^ Construction projects that generate more than $100,000 (e.g. one percent of a capital
budget greater than $10 million) will consume 60% of the one percent allocation for their
public art project. The remaining 40% of the one percent allocation is contributed to the
consolidated fund for use by smaller projects and to complete the priorities of the
community as expressed in the public art master plan.
^ Construction projects that generate an amount between $10,000 and $100,000 will
consume the exact amount of the percent allocation for their public art project.
For example:
Bridgeport Community Centre construction project is valued at $316,000. At one percent, the
public art allocation would be $3,160. The amount is insufficient to support a public art project.
Access to the consolidated account provides an additional $6,840 to create a public art budget
of $10,000.
Consolidated Maintenance Facility construction is valued at $20 million, generating $200,000 for
public art. Utilizing 60% of $200,000 provides $120,000 for public art and contributes $80,000 to
the consolidated account.
Kingsdale Community Centre with a construction budget of $2.8 million generates a public art
budget of $28,000 and stands as it is.
Applying this method of using pooled funds to the current capital budget forecast (2008 - 2017),
three projects would contribute funds to the pool, three would draw from the pool to achieve the
$10,000 minimum, and five would have no impact on the pool's bottom line. The annual average
balance in the pool after servicing the identified capital projects (based on seven-year total)
would be approximately $34,000 to be used for non-construction site projects such as digital
media projects, master plan priorities, public education and promotion.
Partnerships
Partnerships with other arts agencies in the community such as Kitchener-Waterloo Art Gallery,
Contemporary Art Forum Kitchener and Area, and the Downtown BIA are identified in the review
as being important.
Growth in public art in Kitchener may also be achieved, in time, with institutional developers and
private developers. The current percent for art policy states that if the City has supplied a
construction loan or grant to an outside agency, that agency is encouraged to participate in the
percent for art program on a voluntary basis. However, such participation could be ensured with
a loan or grant provision that makes participation a condition of the loan or grant. Further, the
private development community's participation will continue to be examined by staff in
partnership with the Planning Department during 2009.
6
Report No. CSD-08-093 Page 7
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Moving from the old policies to the new one does not require an increase in funding. The one
percent funding mechanism remains in place as an allocation from those civic construction
budgets exceeding $100,000. The one percent is applied to Council-approved revised
construction budgets.
The allocations are brought together in a consolidated public art capital account to implement
the program.
Through the consolidated account, every civic construction project contributing to the allocation
would be eligible for a minimum $10,000-level public art project.
Public art budgets would be developed as follows:
^ Projects that generate less than $10,000 (e.g. one percent of a capital budget less than
$1 million) are supplemented from the consolidated account to the $10,000 level for any
one public art project
^ Construction projects that generate more than $100,000 (e.g. one percent of a capital
budget greater than $10 million) will consume 60% of the one percent allocation for their
public art project. The remaining 40% of the one percent allocation is contributed to the
consolidated fund for use by smaller projects and to complete the priorities of the
community as expressed in the public art master plan.
^ Construction projects that generate an amount between $10,000 and $100,000 will
consume the exact amount of the percent allocation for their public art project.
COMMUNICATIONS:
Throughout the policy and program review, stakeholders, the public, and advisory committees
participated in bringing the voice of the community to the study. Presentations of work-in-
progress were made on October 6 to a Council Strategy Session and on November 18 to
Corporate Management Team. The Arts and Culture Advisory Committee and the Public Art
Working Group support the new policy.
Mark Hildebrand,
Director, Community Programs and Services
7
COUNCIL POLICY RESOLUTION
POLICY NUMBER: DATE: November 2008
POLICY TYPE:
SUBJECT: PUBLIC ART POLICY
1.0 PURPOSE
Kitchener is a vibrant community where the best forms of public art explore our diversity,
tell our stories, and welcome artists to use creativity and imagination to make our public
spaces landmarks and gathering places.
The goal of the public art policy is to contribute to the City's cultural identity and its
strategic priorities. Better quality of life, increased social cohesion, good urban design,
broad community involvement, increased potential for economic development and public
access to the arts are some of the intended benefits.
2.0 SCOPE
2.1 The policy serves the City of Kitchener's many neighbourhoods. It supports the
development of partnerships with the general public, the arts community and arts service
organizations, and with institutional and private sector partners.
2.2 Two citizen advisory committees are directly involved in the public art program: the
Arts and Culture Advisory Committee and the Public Art Working Group.
2.3 The policy affects the following City departments: Economic Development, Finance,
Legal, Facilities Management, Community Services, and Development and Technical
Services (Planning, Engineering). The Arts and Culture Unit, Community Services
Department, is primarily responsible for policy implementation.
2.4 The policy governs programming which results in the permanent acquisition and/or
temporary display of public artworks. Program funding derives from a one percent
allocation applied to civic projects with construction budgets over $100,000. The
municipal public art collection develops through this program.
2.5 The policy does not govern programming under the Industrial Artifacts Project title,
nor the Artist-in-Residence program.
KITCHENER Page 1 December 2008
COUNCIL POLICY RESOLUTION
3.0 DEFINITION
Public Art: original art works, permanent or temporary, in any medium or discipline,
placed, incorporated or performed in publicly accessible indoor or outdoor locations in
response to the site and for the benefit of the public.
For the purposes of this policy, Public Art does not include plaques, archival collections
or heritage assets already supported by other budgets, committees and policies.
4 n Pni ir~v
4.1 Through the public art program, the City acquires art works of excellent quality for
the purpose of permanent or temporary displays in public places such as civic buildings,
civic plazas, streetscapes, and open spaces (parks, trails).
4.2 A master plan for public art contains strategies for the best use of funding and
preferred sites based on specific criteria. Criteria for preferred public art sites and art
works include high visibility locations and appropriate scale, ease of public access,
relevance to the community, ease of maintenance, consistency with the City's Urban
Design Guidelines and Neighbourhood Design Guidelines, quality of the art work, budget
considerations and equitable distribution of sites throughout the City.
4.3 One percent of the construction costs of civic projects with budgets in excess of
$100,000 are allocated to a consolidated public art capital account.
4.4 Civic construction projects contributing to the consolidated capital account are
eligible for a public art project as follows:
^ Projects that generate less than $10,000 (e.g. one percent of a capital budget
less than $1 million) are supplemented from the consolidated account to the
$10,000 level for any one public art project
^ Construction projects that generate more than $100,000 (e.g. one percent of a
capital budget greater than $10 million}; will consume 60% of the one percent
allocation for their public art project. The remaining 40% of the one percent
allocation is contributed to the consolidated fund for use by smaller projects and
to complete the priorities of the community as expressed in the public art master
plan.
^ Construction projects that generate an amount between $10,000 and $100,000
will consume the exact amount of the percent allocation for their public art
project.
4.5 The consolidated account enables a choice of options for public art projects:
(a) public art projects at civic sites
(b) temporary installation projects such as digital projections on the Berlin Tower
(c) promotion of the collection and public education.
4.6 Eligible construction project budgets are identified annually during the capital budget
process.
4.7 The program continues to support public art objectives as described in the Official
Plan and other approved planning documents.
KITCHENER Page 2 December 2008
COUNCIL POLICY RESOLUTION
4.8 The City engages in public art partnerships with the private sector, the institutional
sector, arts organizations, and other governments.
4.9 The City encourages the private development sector to participate voluntarily in the
percent for art program.
4.10 In construction projects for which the City has provided grants or loans to an
outside agency, the terms of the loan or grant agreement include a requirement for
public art to be included in that project. The grantor loan must be in excess of $100,000.
The one percent allocation will not exceed $300,000.
4.11 The public art collection is documented and maintained to the highest standards.
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 Roles and Responsibilities
5.1.1 The Arts and Culture Unit manages the public art program and is responsible for
project development and monitoring, competition processes, collection management,
communications, and partnership creation. However, the program's implementation
depends on participation from many departments in varying degrees. These roles range
from contract preparation to art work maintenance.
5.1.2. The Arts and Culture Advisory Committee's permanent sub-committee, the Public
Art Working Group (PAWG), provides specialized advice on policy, program and projects
and champions the program in the community. All acquisitions, whether bycompetition-
derived commission, direct purchase, or donation, are reviewed by PAWG and then by
the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee. This advisory committee support is
communicated to Council when recommendations are made. PAWG members routinely
serve on competition juries.
5.1.3. Both the general community and members of the arts community participate in
competition juries to provide balance and stakeholder involvement. Ward councillors are
invited to participate on a public art juries which serve their wards.
5.1.4 Public art celebrations are designed to be public events.
5.2 Project Planning
Public art information is included in RFP documents for eligible construction projects.
With this approach, public art is integrated earlier into the capital project for both
efficiency and optimum results.
5.3 Acquisition Methods
A variety of acquisition methods are used to better serve the needs of unique projects
and situations and the overall mandate of the collection. Open competition-generated
commissions, invitational competition-generated commissions, direct purchases and
donations are used.
5.5 Jury Procedures
KITCHENER Page 3 December 2008
COUNCIL POLICY RESOLUTION
Competition juries ensure a fair public process through balanced participation by
community representatives, other project stakeholders and professional arts community
representatives. Competition juries function in accordance with established procedures.
5.6 Technical Review of Proposals
All commission proposals derived from competitions, and proposals for direct purchases,
are reviewed by an interdepartmental staff team and, as needs warrant, by outside
experts, to assess compliance with mechanical, structural, health and safety, and
maintenance requirements.
5.7 Education
Public education strategies include, but are not limited to, participation on juries,
communication tools such as signage, artist talks, brochures, website information, and
public art symposia.
KITCHENER Page 4 December 2008