Recommendation to Review and Provide Feedback on Identified Primary Future Art Locations and on the Process of Primary Site Identification
To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Public Art Commission
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Jack Denham Conroy was selected as a fellow through the CivicSpark program to create a process for public outreach related to physical art site selection. This process is the capstone project of his fellowship.
This is an informational report to detail the results of initial analyses from multiple sites and community engagement data received from surveys, to suggest primary future public art locations, and to collect feedback from the Commission on how to proceed on selecting a site(s) for future public physical art.
The initial site analysis involved ranking thirty-nine (39) locations across Alameda using criteria outlined in the Public Art Master Plan. Those criteria were Geographic Equity, Visibility, Accessibility, Environmental Suitability, and Safety. A spreadsheet was designed that ranked each criteria on a scale of 1-10 based on research on Alameda’s General Plan, Public Art Master Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Annual Report on Transportation, and Vision Zero, as well as independent site analysis After scoring each location on those criteria, the scores were averaged using a weighted average and the top twelve highest scoring locations were put into a Public Art Survey for community engagement.
This outreach process consisted of tabling at four community events between April 21 and June 1, 2024. At these events, people were able to get Alameda prizes (mugs, bags, bandanas, cutlery sets, and more) if they took a public art survey that aimed to get their feedback on where they wanted to see future public art. The survey asked each person to rank 12 Alameda sites for locating physical public art. This survey was also posted to the City Facebook page and sent to the Public Art and citywide email lists. Three hundred and seven (307) responses were received. Those responses were quantified and put back into the site analysis spreadsheet where community input was included as another criterion. The scores were averaged again using the weighted average to rank the top five (5) locations for future public art for PAC‘s consideration. Those five locations are:
1. Main Street Ferry Terminal
2. Lincoln Park
3. Washington Park
4. Central & Encinal Roundabout
5. Franklin Park
Staff is recommending that the Public Art Commission (PAC) review the proposed primary future public art locations and provide feedback on the replication of the process.
BACKGROUND
In December of 2023 the City of Alameda (City) adopted the Public Art Master Plan (Plan) to guide the implementation of the City of Alameda’s public art program, in alignment with the vision and goals of the City Council, PAC and Alameda community. The Five-Year Action Plan included in the Plan, which outlines actionable tasks associated with seven key recommendations to be taken over the next five years, identifies the need to “develop a process for identifying sites for public art in the future.” Furthermore, the Plan identifies as a priority action item in Year 2 of the Five-Year Action Plan to “select a site and release a grant application for physical artworks”.
The Plan also offers an initial map of potential locations for future public art suggested by city staff. The suggestions include parks, upcoming municipal projects, and ferry terminals that staff identified as being appropriate for physical public art. To transition from that large map of sites to a list of priority sites, there needed to be a process for analyzing and prioritizing sites. That process was designed using site analysis criteria laid out in the Plan and was brought before the PAC for review.
After conducting public outreach and receiving feedback from the PAC to inform physical art site selection and future site selection processes, Public Art Program staff plan to release a competitive request for proposals (RFP) for physical art by the end of 2024. The RFP will include a pre-identified site(s) for physical art. There is currently approximately $772,000 available in the Public Art Fund for physical art.
On March 25, 2024 a plan for future public art site analysis and community engagement was brought before the PAC. The PAC gave feedback on the community engagement plan and survey and suggested that locations from the 2012 “Synergy: Public Art for Alameda” assessment (Synergy) also be considered. The PAC also suggested that a potential location on Park and Webster be considered but oversight in the initial spreadsheet creation led to it not being considered. The plan for site analysis was to rank suggested potential sites using criteria laid out in the Public Art Master Plan. Those criteria were as follows:
● Consider visibility: Choose locations where the artwork will be highly visible to the public, such as in busy pedestrian areas, public parks, or near public transportation.
● Evaluate accessibility: Ensure that the location is accessible to all members of the community, regardless of physical abilities, and consider factors such as curb cuts, sidewalks, and other accessibility features.
● Equitable geographic distribution: Consider the existing locations of physical public artworks and ensure artworks are geographically distributed throughout the City of Alameda.
● Consider community input: Involve the community in the process of selecting locations for Public Art, through public meetings, surveys, or other outreach efforts. Listen to their opinions and suggestions and take their feedback into account.
● Assess suitability of the environment: Evaluate the physical environment of each potential location, including factors such as climate, exposure to water, animals, birds, light exposure, wind patterns, and existing landscape features, to determine if they are appropriate for the artwork.
● Consider historical significance: Take into account the historical and cultural significance of the location and ensure that the artwork complements and enhances the area’s existing cultural heritage.
● Evaluate safety: Ensure that the location is safe for both the artwork and the public, considering factors such as traffic patterns and natural hazards.
● Evaluate maintenance requirements: Consider the long-term maintenance requirements of the artwork and ensure that the location can accommodate these needs, such as access to electricity and water. Evaluate funding and budget constraints: Consider budget constraints and funding sources when selecting locations for physical public art, as this may impact the type of artwork that can be commissioned and the number of locations that can be considered.
After conversations with City staff, it was made clear that Funding and Maintenance were equal for all potential sites. These criteria were displayed but not considered in the equation of the ranking. Additionally, it was decided that Historical Significance was not able to be evaluated until the plans for the art had been proposed. This criterion was omitted.
DISCUSSION
After receiving feedback from the PAC in March, a spreadsheet was created to rank previously suggested locations from city staff and the Synergy Report. To narrow down that list of thirty-nine (39) to twelve (12) that could be put into a survey, six criteria were considered: Geographic Equity, Geographic Equity - excluding murals, Visibility, Accessibility, Environmental Suitability, and Safety. Each location was given a score 1-10 for all six criteria, creating six unique scores for each potential site.
|
Geographic Equity |
Geographic Equity - excluding murals |
Visibility |
Accessibility |
Environmental Suitability |
Safety |
|
score based on how close proposed locations are to existing public art. |
Scored by considering the distance from existing non-mural public art. |
Score based on analysis of pedestrian plan, annual report on transportation, traffic map, trail maps, connectivity, and observation, i.e. is it a highly trafficked area? |
score based on curb cut access, paved sidewalks, nearby transit, accessible parking, access through site. |
Score based on climate, exposure to water, animals, birds, light exposure, wind patterns, and existing landscape features, to determine if they are appropriate for the artwork. |
Score given based on high traffic and high collision areas, pedestrian safety, & natural hazards |
Those scores were based on research in those criteria areas covering Alameda’s General Plan, Public Art Master Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Annual Report on Transportation, and Vision Zero, as well as independent site analysis. The five scores from those criteria were then added together and averaged, using a weighted scoring that reflected staff’s emphasis on geographic equity. This created an overall score out of ten for each location. Geographic Equity was broken into two columns which were evaluated separately so that proposed locations that were only near existing murals could have part of their Geographic Equity score boosted. Some suggested locations that were not near murals received the same score in both columns.
The initial thirty-nine locations included twenty-six (26) locations suggested in the Public Art Master Plan, and thirteen (13) from the Synergy report. The Public Art Master Plan and Synergy suggestions were considered in Exhibit 1. The twelve locations that had the highest average score of the thirty-nine total considered were as follows:
1. 1. Main Street Ferry Terminal
2. Lincoln Park
3. Krusi Park
4. Towata Park
5. Godfrey Park
6. Shoreline Park
7. Tillman Park
8. Franklin Park
9. Portola Triangle
10. Washington Park
11. 4th & Central Roundabout
12. Central & Encinal Roundabout
These twelve locations were then put into a public art survey to receive community input on which locations were preferred by people who live or work in Alameda.
The Plan describes the need to take “into consideration the cultural context, existing infrastructure, community involvement, and potential impact on the surrounding environment.” The community involvement for this process took place between April 21 and June 7, 2024. It involved tabling at local community events around Alameda to talk with people who live or work in the city and ask that they take a survey to share their thoughts on where future public art should be in Alameda. The survey, seen in Exhibit 3, asked respondents to rank twelve potential locations from most to least desired.
The survey was also sent to the Public Art and citywide email lists, as well as posted to the City’s Facebook page. The survey gathered 307 responses and that response data was then put back into the location analysis spreadsheet (Exhibit 2) as the final criteria to complete the scoring of the locations. The five that scored highest were as follows:
1. Main Street Ferry Terminal
2. Lincoln Park
3. Washington Park
4. Central & Encinal Roundabout
5. Franklin Park
These five locations are currently the primary sites for future physical public art that city staff are asking the PAC to review for consideration in the upcoming physical art RFP.
The survey also gave respondents an opportunity to suggest sites that were not in those twelve listed that they thought would be good to consider in future iterations of this site selection process. There were forty-five suggested locations received from community members. Several suggested locations were around Park Street and the Webster Gateway near Neptune Park. A map of the suggested locations can be seen in Exhibit 4.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the identified primary future public art locations and provide feedback on the replication of the process.
Respectfully submitted,
Lois Butler, Economic Development Division Manager
Secretary
By,
Jack Denham Conroy, CivicSpark Fellow
Exhibits:
1. Initial Future Public Art Site Analysis
2. Final Future Public Art Location Ranking with Community Input
3. Public Art Survey
4. Map of Community Suggested Locations for Future Public Art