Petaluma Public Art Committee scraps Water Street bids

After more than a year of planning and public meetings, Petaluma’s Public Art Committee opted last week to go back to the drawing board with the controversial $150,000 public art project proposed for Water Street.

At its April 28 meeting, the committee shot down the two remaining art proposals for the up and coming waterfront space, deciding neither were a good fit for the first large-scale project to be commissioned using money from the city’s public art fund.

The committee signaled it would look to restart the process at an unidentified time, and placed a discussion about the matter on the agenda for the May 26 meeting, with Chairwoman Alison Marks and committee member Scott Hess absent for the 4-0 vote.

“(Water Street) is the heart of Petaluma,” Vice Chair Annee Booker Knight said. “Much of the city as we know it grew from the river - the shipping and the commerce, everything started there. It’s a complex site with the river running through it, with businesses and pedestrians … there’s a lot going on at the site and we’d really like to get it right. The committee felt that while both proposals were interesting, we didn’t feel like they exactly fit the site, and the budget is hard.”

The proposals that had remained for consideration were “WhirliBird,” a series of four sculptures proposed by Oakland-based arts nonprofit Flux Foundation, and “Vertical River,” a wind-animated piece designed by Sebastopol artist Ned Kahn.

Committee members expressed a handful of concerns about the designs, which have been discussed at previous meetings and at a two-week public open house last month. “Vertical River” seemed too “industrial,” while the Flux Foundation’s partially interactive sculptures had the potential appear “carnivalesque,” committee members said.

“I’d like a little more ‘wow,’” committee member Kevin McDonnell told the panel. “The location that’s available to Ned provides very little ‘wow’ and the Flux ones are nice, but I just don’t get that this is our showcase project.”

After receiving more than 70 requests for proposals for public art in the space, the committee had worked with stakeholders and invited five artists to submit a site-specific proposal for Water Street, Planning Manager Heather Hines said. Four artists were each paid a $1,000 stipend from the public art fund to develop their visions, with the committee narrowing the finalists down to two after a public meeting in January, according to Associate Planner Jacqueline Overzet.

Of the nearly 80 public comments gathered in an online survey and at the open house, more than 30 people favored the Kahn piece while about a dozen were in favor of “WhirliBird,” with about a dozen others asking for both pieces and 10 opting for neither, with some inconclusive responses.

Knight said the committee’s decision was reflective of an overarching “ambivalence” shown by the public during the course of various meetings and workshops, and it also took into consideration the criteria laid out in request for proposals. She added that the decision was difficult but “timely.”

“I believe we needed to go through the process and needed the time to think about the pieces and as a committee and individually,” Knight said.

The $150,000 budget for the project comes from a pool of money collected from developers of large projects who are required to either pay a fee in into the fund or to commission their own public art, Hines said. The public art fund, established with the passing of a 2005 ordinance, currently has a balance of about $330,000, according to the most recent statement.

Possible next steps could include tabling the search for a project for the Water Street location while focusing on getting smaller-scale art into other prominent public spaces like gateways to the city, roundabouts or the newly approved C Street pocket park, according to Knight.

Hines said the committee has options to choose to place art in other locations identified in the city’s Public Art Master Plan aside from just Water Street.

“I think the committee is looking to incorporate more public art in to Petaluma for the benefit of the public,” she said. “Utilizing those funds, they can consider different things, some in near future, some further out. There’s an opportunity to do more small projects that maybe allow for things to happen more quickly.”

The committee agreed that there were lessons to be learned from the process that might be taken into consideration when developing a criteria for the project moving forward.

“In retrospect, I wish we hadn’t undertaken such a large project for our first project,” committee member Karen Petersen said. “It’s a complex site and a big budget. Who isn’t charmed by the river, but it represents so many issues in terms of the sight. Another thing we needed to learn is what you get for $150,000.”?(Contact Beausang at hannah.beausang@arguscourier.com)