Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-04-16; Split Pavilion Committee Ad Hoc; MinutesTRANSCRIPT Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum" City Council Chambers April 16,1992 - 9:00 AM 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carisbad The meeting convened at 9:12 AM with Committee Members Eric Larson, Margaret Stanton, David Sammons, Gary Wrench and Laurie Batter and Andrea Blum present. I. Election of Chair Margaret Stanton nominated Eric Larson as Chair. It was seconded by Gary Wrench with a unanimous vote. Mr. Larson stated the charges of the Committee. Artist Andrea Blum will make a presentation regarding her artwork here In the community. She has not seen it completed until April 15,1992. Then a discussion will commence relaying to her the response of the community to the artwork. Our charges as a committee Is to see a re-examination by the artist and the subcommittee of the design and the materials and the landscaping of the project and to seek the cooperation of the artist on what are artistically acceptable changes. We as a committee are not charged with recommendations for change. We're a fact finding group to find out what the acceptable artistic changes are to the artist. We will then give a report on those facts to the Arts Commission which is meeting on May 7, 1992 to accept the committee's report. The Arts Commission will discuss the issue and then make a recommendation to City Council on how to deal with the issue. II. Presentation of Artwork bv Andrea Blum Artist stated she felt badly that she worked on something for five years and there's a lot of feelings of disgruntlement. 1 feel its my job to take you through the process on why I did what I did and how I feel about it - just so that it turns into some sort of educational forum so that there is an understanding of the process which is very important to me. Originally when I was invited to do this project, the Commission also [refer at the different meetings I went to asked me to include water in the design, to include an overhead structure in the design, and to build some sort of barrier and I use that very freely bett/veen the Ocean Boulevard and the installation. I spent several days here and had a lot of meetings here, and I went back and started thinking about what to do. My primary concern at that point was how do you start designing a piece that's structurally this ttiangular shape that orients itself towards the water. So I thought well if there's a pavilion structure, which would provide protection from the sun for people who cannot be in the sun, that's a good way to start. That determined the height, because one's body, 'Ihe body" determines the height of any structure. The height of the pavilion was the given, and how do you have some sort of visual separation from the Ocean Boulevard which is going to get more and more busy as time goes on with traffic that would not block the view and would also give some sort of cinematic quality to the entrance and exit from the City proper. So my limitations were if I use wood, then the element of wood is too big and it also rots. Wood is sort of canceled out immediately. So then metal took its place. How can I build a structure that is linear, that uses the smallest pole-like structure, rail structure and still engineering wise is efficient. That determined the rail element. So its the cinematic, sense of the scrim, the difference between Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 2 going by In a car, going by on foot, being inside the space, those are the three primary considerations. I wanted a piece that was active by day and by night, I wanted the sense that the ocean reappear on this upper level in the water so that there is some sort of connection between the street level and the level below and It also becomes this frame back to the ocean. I wanted a shifting of levels so that you do enter the space - it sort of is a gateway - some sort of frame back to the sea. There were a lot of things I was thinking about but its sort of difficult to run by them and also there is the discussion of what makes something a piece of art. If I could explain every moment of every thought -1 don't think that's possible, 1 think Its part of a creative process. By no Intention did I mean to antagonize anyone here. In fact, 1 thought I was trying to address very directly some of the needs of this community in terms of pass through, in terms of access to the beach, in terms of protection, in terms of daylight and nightlife and obviously there's some concern about that. I'm here just to talk about art. I'm not here to talk about politics, and I don't feel I have to defend what I do, because I really believe in what I do. 1 have made a lot of work around the Country and in Europe and I think part of the notion of public art is you can never reach consensus. If you try to get a consensus, then I think there's trouble. On the other hand, I think its difficult to see something that you've never seen before and say I love it, I want it, its mine, its great. I think that everything is a process. I think that the way this whole program had been designed allowed for that process, allowed for that change in terms of all the meetings that we did have. Everyone is not going to be heard obviously if you're not present, so I did the best I could do. I feel very badly that Its problematic. I've thought for the last three months of the different ways, what happens if this gets lowered, if that gets removed. The whole piece Is designed as a puzzle, and if one thing Is taken out then the whole thing goes away. The process of art which is different than any other process is the idea gets thought about, some in a very logical way, some you think that way. I am who I am and I design things the way I did and I came with that before- hand. My sensibility was very known to the Commission who selected me beforehand. Its not that what I did was so different in some way than I've ever done work before. Mr. Larson asked if there were questions from the Committee on Ms. Blum's comments. You mentioned your thoughts and what went into this artwork. As we go on, we'll probably be asking some specific things, about why certain things are exactly why they are and so don't feel badly that you're not giving us all your thoughts right now. It will be up to us to draw some of that out and find out. Gary Wrench is going to give a response regarding the acceptance of the work here in the City and some observations that he has. Committee member Gary Wrench stated as follows: I've been asked to summarize the community response which I think is a formidable assignment. The community has been responding for a number of months now, and I can hardly remember any Incident over the life of the city which has evoked more response, but I will try. I have gone through my files of the published materials, the letters, notes I kept of the public hearings and I will try to digest the basic themes which have occurred in all of those hearings for you. Many of the responses, let me say, involve the art and the artist, but many do not. There has been much response from the community that clearly has to do with feelings about the City's priorities, feelings about the process, feelings about responsiveness of city officials to citizen input, to alternative uses which should have been made or could have been made for this site, the accuracy of communication has been brought under attack, the cost, the appropriateness of the cost, given other circumstances, interruption to the business and on and on. I think that is not our purpose to get into those, and I will avoid comment about those issues. If they are issues, I think they're properly to be addressed by the City Council or other Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 3 forums. But 1 think that's not the purpose of this committee today. They don't involve the artist per say. In talking about the feelings about the art itself, it kind of spans an entire continuum - if you plotted it. It would be a Gaussian distribution with some people way off on one end for and some people way off on the other end hard against and It might be tilted, not the normal distribution curve, but there Is a continuum. It spans the range of love It, hate it and a lot of stuff in between. With a lot of the citizen Input 1 have been really Impressed with how cogent and well reasoned the arguments on both sides have been made. There are some wonderful extemporaneous speakers in the city. There have been some numerous comments, a great deal of emotional comments and I think 1 would have to characterize a great deal of the comment as plainly hysterical. Getting into the categories of reaction - there are people who unqualifiedly support the art. who love it just as it is - who think its terrific and who either because of having tracked the process or without having tracked the process think its fine just the way it is. They look at it and they say yes, she accomplished her purpose and the art is a good piece and I like it. There are many people that say that. There is another group that support it on principle. They say well, I'm not necessarily passionate about it, but I'm certainly opposed to censorship, I certainly respect the integrity of art and the artist's wishes and so I support it on principle. And perhaps I will grow to love it -1 don't feel passionate about it now, but that's the history of art and arttA/orks and over the years perhaps I will grow to like it or perhaps not, but at least I will keep an open mind. Then we move into a very sizeable category of support or comment which is kind of a qualified support. They say well, 1 generally like it, and it is generally okay except,. They say, except for this and except for that. One of the most common objections by those who have some degree of openness has to do with the landscaping. There are people who have said they wish it was grass - that it to say lawn. Some wish it were a little more bushier, a little more luxuriant. Some wish it were higher. Some say the artist intended for it to be plain art - its a very plain art piece or angular piece and if it's to be a low. flat area then at least it should be some other material than the iceplant that was selected. A very large group of the people who give this kind of particular objection to the landscaping have expressed the feeling that almost anything except the old style sea fig or what some call "pickleweed" would be better. People say that given the alternatives available to landscape architects these days, almost no one knowledgeable in Southern California is really using that kind of landscape material any more. It's a kind of archaic one and they point out it's being removed and discontinued from service by CALTRANS and people that are planting major public parks. I think we have to note that the objection to the particular landscaping is a major source of concern and I think there are many people who would give it a much stronger vote of confidence were that adjusted. There seems to be another category who are swayed by their feelings or whose feelings derive from the fact that the project simply doesn't match what they expected. It didn't come out in the way they had in their mind's eye. This is a very difficult area to deal with, but it seems their mind's eye view of what they thought might be there could have been influenced by some of the names given to the project in the early days. Early names used for it were Streetscape or sculpture park and I think people perhaps didn't know what Streetscape meant - it sounds like landscape so is it to be a landscape project. If it was to be a sculpture park, where are the picnic tables? If it was to have a sculpture element, where are the statue? If it was to be artistic where were the frescos, the murals or the mosaics and somehow if they had this mind set it seems to have been a disappointment or an upset to their mind's eye view. So they say, what is it? Part of the problem seems to be that it doesn't fit into a category that people understand. I feel that a fair amount of the reaction and negative response seems to flow from a lack of understanding of whether this is art or architecture and if its architecture is it a combination of structure and landscape architecture or Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 4 is it art and something different. 1 think we're in an awkward area for many of us who are not quite clear where that fits. That's sort of moving into a large part of the middle ground, those who are still open to qualified support except for. Then we come to another design element which Is attracted a great amount of objection - the bars. The single greatest rallying component probably for the opponents of this project are the bars. What is it that's objectionable the bars? One theme is that they block the view. I think probably a theme that has been articulated very ably and very well and very persistently is that bars are negative. I found that in my notes on numerous occasions from several spokesmen, that somehow people have negative associations with bars - associated with jails, with cages, with crowd control, with the barriers at the Howsten Street Subway Stop on the upper East side, just East of Harlem. They say Is this right for here? They're associated with dangerous animals whether they're human or othenA/ise. They're regarded as Industtial material as executed. They're thought of as unfriendly and perhaps something more appropriate to big cities and not appropriate to a seaside village. The negativism of the galvanized steel bars has been a substantial rallying point. The idea of a screen built of galvanized steel bars has really gotten substantial negative reaction. On the other hand, the bars by some of the more moderate people who are sort of moderately opposed or qualified on support, many people have expressed a surprise and pleasure at the feeling of separation which the fence provides when you're on the ocean side of them. This is a surprisingly universal comment. You could almost think the opposition falls Into two camps - those who view it from the street side going by in their cars, walking by or jogging by or whatever and those who walk by on the ocean side of the project. It's a very universal reaction to say ah - its really quite different over here, I can't explain it clearly - it doesn't do anything physical to impair the noise, dust or even the view, but there is a feeling. This other group of people in this middle ground say that well, we really kind of accept the idea of a screen - but does it have to be galvanized pipe. People have remarked favorably on the shadows. They like the idea of the shadows and the play of light that the screening provides - but does it have to be galvanized pipe. Wood has been suggested - you've addressed that. What about other metallic shapes. There are conventionally available shapes, there are T-bar sections, I-beam sections, extruded triangles, extrusions can be had in virtually any shape. Those types of issues have come up with regard to the screen - with regard to alternatives to the bars. Some objections that people have in searching what it is that bothers them about it is maybe its too tall. Can it be shorter, can it be a different color, but I think the heart of the matter goes to the negativity and to the negative feelings that flow from the use of the galvanized steel in such a large diameter. It sort of matches the cage syndrome. That's a very large part of the middle ground. Way out on the extreme opposition side, there are those who I think who perhaps have cultivated tastes in art and who simply hate it as art. And that is a legitimate feeling and we've all seen art like that. There are others who have been thoughtful enough to say that its simply inappropriate for the site. A quote I wrote down from an early meeting, 'The artist really doesn't understand the beach ambiance". The census in another articulation of it is it may be good art but its all wrong for that site and its incompatible for its surroundings. As the weeks and the months go by we cycle through the continuum of opposition. Mr. Larson asked members of the Committee if they had anything they wanted to state on that same subject. Margaret Stanton replied that based upon the letters that she has read that have come Into the Council Office, I think Mr. Wrench has articulated very well the concerns of the community. It might help me and maybe others that are present if you would talk a little bit about Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 5 the piece as pieces of a puzzle and how they fit together - as the benches opposed to the trough as opposed to the height of the bars and the height of the pavilion. Andrea Blum responded that the given is the body. Whatever structure that was there had to allow for the body to engage with. A bench height Is a standard height - its 18 Inches up. The depressions in the troughs are the absence of the bench, so their 18 inches deep - so you have the positive/negative. The framing towards the ocean and along the pass through to the ocean where it wasn't too crimped or It wasn't too generalized determined the openings toward the ocean of the paths. If for example, the pavilion which had to be at the 8 foot height (actually it was higher - but 1 lowered it). In order for it to visually make sense and conceptually make sense then the other elements that were above grade had to be that height which determined the rail along the Ocean Boulevard. If lets say, the rail along the Ocean Boulevard were five feet high, then (1) it visually cuts your view because it's within your body range - it splits it. You can see that along the lower rail further south along the highway when you're in a car. You can't see the ocean as it blocks out that space. To simplify the structure and when you simplify the structure you allow for other things to happen - natural things to happen, light, shadow, you don't confuse the issue. By keeping the structure very minimal, then its was easier to read some of the things that come out of it. By shifting heights back and forth, it becomes a hodge podge, it doesn't visually hold together. In this piece, the dimensions of the bench, originally on the lower deck there were water troughs but there was some concern that people would walk into them when they rounded that corner so I made them into bench sttuctures - so it was just lifting up what had been depressed initially. There is a scale relationship in relationship to the body. Laurie Batter stated it would help also if you explain the relationship of the height of the scrim and the spacing of the bars, etc. and how that relates to the pavilion itself. Ms. Blum stated the scrim was eight feet high along the street. When it turns toward the ocean it flips. It's still vertical and then the top part of the pavilion is at an 8 foot elevation. So its just the same plane that goes in one direction and flips and goes into the other direction. Ms. Blum responded to Mr. Wrench about the shape of the bar. We used to my knowledge, I'm not an engineer so this Is sort of handed over to Engineering. We used the smallest bar possible that would physically and structurally be safe, be sound. In making it round, I wanted it round simply because it reflects the light more. If it's a shape like a square or an I-beam shape or a triangular shape, then there's always something in shadow which would also become more structural. So the circular form was about reflection. The size was the minimum size we could use to my knowledge. 1 did not want a heavy bar. The distance between was the smallest distance which could provide this sequential cinematic effect, but also was safe so that your head cannot get caught in it and also be structural. I did not want a horizontal on the bottom. I wanted to go right into the vertical wall, because if it were horizontal, it becomes more of a block - a visual block even though it doesn't block anything it just stays in the mind more as a visual block. There's the structural, the engineering as well as the aesthetic. Things had to be shifted to be safe and my desire was to have the smallest dimension circular post possible. David Sammons stated that they talked at length about this issue and your statement. Could you tell us about this right before the fabrication this summer, that a sample of the bar and the finish was brought to the site. I think they had made the outside diameter (Richard Cook can confirm) an inch and a half possibly up to an inch and three quarters and it was horrible. It was really Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 6 bulky and it was a painted finish and it looked like a painted finish - it looked tacky - it looked easy to scrape off and easily chewed up and it was too bulky. She asked what is the smallest we can do? As I recall it was an inch and a quarter OD and they could work on the strength of the rail on the interior - its a thicker wall. That's what I recall. I've not been out with a ruler. I did notice you (D. Sammons) out there last night with a ruler. They (engineers) understood what my concern was and also Its about the distance between as well as the diameter of the individual rail. That's also part of the puzzle. You design something - how do you engineer it, and how do you do it so it stands. I have nothing invested in an inch and a half or an inch and a quarter - I just wanted the smallest. David Sammons replied. But in your concept of this piece, you felt that an Inch and a half, inch and five eighths was too bulky and if I'm understanding this and you were told an inch and a quarter tubing would be structurally sound that was what they were planning to go for and as you looked at the piece, you Imagined it an inch and a quarter, because as you Imagined it and inch and five eighths or an inch and a half was too big and too bulky for these upright pieces of tubing. Andrea Blum stated what she imagined was smaller, was closer together and asked what the measurement was. I came in an out about seven times during construction and about five times prior to construction. I know that when we met with Dick Cook, that it was make it the smallest you can make it that is structurally sound. David Sammons replied that maybe this is where he did not quite understand. He stated he was a machinist and did things to a tolerance. I deal within thousandths of an inch - tolerances I deal with. As an artist looking at my design and my concept, I would have certain tolerances that I would want also. Having stated you were worried about the balkiness, you basically challenged us last night in your comments that bar is inch and a quarter and a few of us on the committee looked at each other and said we don't think so. My curiosity was aroused and I took my veneer calipers down there and measured it, and basically what the tubing is an inch and five eighths plus forty thousandths for the galvanized coating. That doesn't sound like a lot, forty thousandths and inch and five eighths from inch and a quarter, but what I'm driving at is the amount of tolerance in your mind as the artist that's allowable. Again, it doesn't sound like a lot, but that is a 25% tolerance on what you thought was acceptable and what you thought is too bulky. In your mind then, is most of your creative work allowable to 25%? Ms. Blum stated she felt that was an unfair question. I wanted the smallest they could do. That's all I wanted. As far as I know, they did the smallest they could do given the spacing and given the type of structure they had to do. This is a question for the engineers. My work does not allow for 25 % tolerance. But at a certain point, especially when working on a public site, you do have to consider the logistics of the engineering. So at a certain point, it gets brought over into another realm that's beyond aesthetics. What they actually did, is a conversation that should be with Richard Cook. What I do understand, is that more importantly than the actual, fractional addition or subtraction on the rails is a sense of the hardness. This gets back to what Mr. Wrench was talking about earlier in terms of the landscape. In terms of that being a concern. At this point, Mr. Larson asked if Committee Members had any other questions regarding choice of materials. Margaret Stanton asked about all the materials, and how Ms. Blum feels since she is seeing it now in its final form - about all the materials, the cement, the bars, the width of the bars. Ms. Blum responded that her sense of the piece yesterday, quite honestly she does like it. Something happened in terms of the landscape where I think it needs a lot of work. The finish Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 7 work on the concrete in terms of sealers and stuff needs to be cleaned up - it's a little sloppy. I think that the landscaping in terms - there used to be water and there used to be light on the lower deck. That had to be removed - and again it fits right into the puzzle. Because that had to be changed and the other elements hadn't been changed, it all needed adjustment. In seeing It yesterday, the landscaping doesn't work. In fact, the landscaping has to be much much more lush and more developed than it Is now. What I envisioned in terms of that, I think it makes it a little too cool. There's a lot of flexibility. I was walking on the beach this morning and noticing how people had done things and there's a sense of beauty and very impressive. Some of that - the piece needs in terms of landscape which would then soften some of the other elements. It doesn't look quite finished, all the hardware's exposed. I think that would be a wonderful addition. I think there are people who are out here and we could work together because they have knowledge and I don't in that respect. I think that will sort of soften the whole sense of the entrance and soften the sense of the rail and compliment the concrete. It would be much more lush, much more seductive - it would look better. Margaret Stanton asked if Ms. Blum would be agreeable to having a landscape design that might be different than what is there now. Ms. Blum replied she'd welcome it. Margaret also asked if it would be still a flat kind of landscaping or would it be low. Ms. Blum replied, that you wouldn't want anything higher than two feet because then you get into a blocking. I realize nature is not that uniform, so I would think there would be a range of plant materials. The grasses here are beautiful, the succulents here are beautiful. I'm not that interested in flowers, I'm interested in plants. I think there is a range. You have those banks. 1 think that within a low tNO foot there's a modulation that naturally, unfortunately will take place and things could pop up beyond that obviously, but it would be varied. Eric Larson asked what role Ms. Blum would want to play in the landscaping change. Do you want to take a look at a landscaping plan - what's your expertise in landscaping - do you see that the City perhaps can use Its own landscape architect and kind of freehand do that under your parameters of two feet of height. Ms. Blum responded she has no expertise in landscape architecture. There's a certain sense, a certain feel and I would like to discuss with who's going to do it and I would like to look at the plans and discuss it with whoever is going to do the design. I don't think I'm capable of doing that design. I'm not a landscape architect. I'm sure there's someone from the City or someone else you know that would a much better job. Eric Larson stated that the acceptable change to Ms. Blum would be to have a dialogue with the landscape architect to discuss materials, textures, height, placement of shrubs, succulents in a generic sense once a plan is done take a look at it and see the layout of it and perhaps get some exposure to what those materials are as opposed to just a drawing on a landscape architect's plan. You'd probably want to see the plant materials selected. Ms. Blum replied she'd like discuss It. It's like everything else - the person who designs It is going to have a certain taste and I'm going to have a certain taste and maybe its very different from that person and so there's a discussion. You understand we'll have some limitations because we're being very specific that it be drought tolerant materials, perhaps some natives in that regard. Gary Wrench stated he thought the committee understood, but just to make sure it's said clearly, to clarify your concept, Andrea would permit a variety of plants - you're not looking for uniformity. Andrea Blum stated that she wanted to make people happy. She wanted to feel good about the piece in its entirety. I designed it as a plainer landscape theme and it doesn't work. Fortunately, because its removable, a variate scheme can certainly be designed for this. Mr. Larson asked for Committee comments or questions about the landscaping. Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 8 Margaret Stanton stated she would like to add that a change in the landscaping will certainly soften the entire piece because as it is with planes, changing the plane in a more curvy soft way with different heights of landscaping will go along way to do that. Andrea stated what she thought would like nice is that when you enter it, it then reinforces the whole structure of the pavilion, because you're sort of walking through this area that is much more natural. I viewed it differently, but I think this would be a nice addition to it. Eric Larson moved the Issue back to the materials - there are a lot of questions asked about the materials. He asked Ms. Blum If she was satisfied with the selection of materials even if you're not completely satisfied with the workmanship - talking about the coating on the concrete, the color of the concrete, galvanized versus painted bars. The materials themselves are as you expected. Mr. Wrench asked that just In the interest of the full exploration of the possibilities, I understand your point Andrea about the lack of shadow provided by a round shape as compared to say an I-beam or T-bar shape. How bad would a T-bar shape or I-beam shape be? They're so far apart, I don't think there's really any time of day, possibly one right overhead, but is would simply be one part of a bar shadowing another part of a bar. It seems to me engineering wise that no dimension of these things would probably exceed an inch and a quarter. Bars could be rolled - there's catalog stuff, but if necessary you could specify I-beam or T-beam sections with any wall thickness in order to get the strength. It seems to me that an I-beam section or T-beam section put at alternating would have the possibility of preserving the scrim concept but avoiding this negativity of the jail, the cage, the crow control. I would be interested in your reaction to that. Andrea stated that ultimately whatever shape the rail would have it's still is the same effect in terms of the whole piece. Be it round or square, the issue is the rail - not the shape of the rail. The circular is more reflective. It dissipates the structure more than something that has more of a regulated shape. Eric Larson stated that on the rails, stated he felt at a little bit of a loss and was something they were going to have to ask someone else regarding the rails and the diameter. Margaret Stanton had a question about this - you're intent was to have the smallest, thinnest rails possible. Andrea stated her intent was to have the smallest diameter rail that would be galvanized with a distance that was small enough that would provide the sense of the scrim and the cinematic. Margaret Stanton asked if in fact there could be rails that were smaller than one and five-eighths inch, would that be acceptable. Andrea replied, that would be something she would have to look at. There's more involved than just the vertical. There's the horizontal, there's also what holds the pavilion, what holds the flat ends, the whole connecting mechanism. So 1 can't off the top of my head say yes. It all is connected - it all would have to be looked at. Margaret asked if Andrea would be willing to look at this if we could find rails that were smaller in diameter that would work. Andrea stated that you would have to realize that the distance would also shift bettA/een them. I'm not sure what you'd be gaining by that. Mr. Larson stated that this was an engineering question. That what is there is a product of Ms. Blum wanting the smallest diameter rail, not having them so close together someone could get their head stuck and be sttucturally sound at that height. Any changes In those is going to be an engineering change. Someone other than the committee is going to have to ask those questions. Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 9 David Sammons asked about the eight foot level requirement in the pavilion area. You stated that whatever the body, the given body height is what set the height of the pavilion area. Is that a discrefionary. Andrea replied it's a displacement of the room - an eight foot high room is what you're used to In Interior contacts. So by bringing It outdoors it's displacement of the room into an outdoor, public setting. Not like, 6'6" clearance, it's an architectural/body relafionship. David Sammons asked, so in your concept, this 8 foot level is what you were striving for, so the fact that It's ten feet In the pavilion area, explain this difference? Gary Wrench Interjects that there is a scale consideration In effect when an area is meant to hold 3 people, ten people, crowds - the ceiling ascends in balance. Andrea stated, when you move something outside, the scale has to shift. She cannot now recall the exact measurements done in 1987. The site has a shifting elevation, bench height, wall height, to take the room outside and still make it airy enough. David Sammons stated that he is having difficulty understanding that measurements change from 8 feet to ten feet. Conceptual statements seem to apply to any situation. This is the biggest problem that the cifizenry of Carlsbad has. We maybe don't understand the process of an artist's mind during design. In 1987 the details were : this will be a pavilion area, white enameled, lush and green. Going by comments you made last evening, I can only gather that as this process goes on, you're free to do with the piece what you think is appropriate as it is built. For example, the color of the bars; you said, "As it went up and began to go together, the white began to look cheap to me. so we went with the galvanized." Andrea replied, on the drawings the bars were specified to be painted, and the color was to be determined at the fime of installafion. We put in that as a parameter, because it's more expensive to paint that to galvanize. David Sammons stated that he didn't want to belabor that particular item. But this wasn't relayed to the people of Carlsbad, they were told white enamel bars. We sttuggle with this process and with your freedom to make these types of changes from concept to completion. Can you address that? You stated last night that you visited seven or eight fimes during construction. When someone asked wasn't it hard not to be there for all the decisions, you said you were there for most of the on-site decisions, but with every piece that you build you like that surprise when you see it completed. Andrea responded that he was confusing ttA/o issues; the element of surprise is not discovering that something planned at 60 feet has become 90 feet, but in noticing the elements that are really appealing. In the process of design, thinking about a project and after it's done, those can be really different things. In terms of any alterafions that had to take place, look, the drawings were done seven years ago and during construcfion we found out that something had to be put over the water troughs because some people had become concerned over safety issues. There was nothing in the design that had to be changed that was not brought before the Arts Commission in terms of the color of the concrete, reducfion of "designy" elements of the piece. Nothing was done on the spur of the moment at my own whim. Laurie Batter asked Andrea to speak about why she felt it was necessary to make the color changes. Andrea answered, there were patterns in the concrete and in the trellis which were both were curvilineal. As she looked at it she decided it looked decorative and lacking in substance and could no longer defend it in her own mind. BettA/een 1987 and 1990 all her work undenA/ent simplification. Part of that process was to think about the sttucture and its relationships and she changed the color because It didn't have much meaning for her. Gary Wrench asked for her thoughts on the difference between art and architecture. He understood that architecture deals In dimensions and plans and specificafions, while in art we discuss matters of taste, style and artisfic judgement. How do you approach Art vs. Architecture? Meeting with Artist Andrea Blum Page 10 Andrea said her interest is in making work which "falls through the cracks" and is difficult to define. If you understand art as the sculpture on the pedestal and architecture as providing the places where we live and go to work, with certain funcfional, pracfical needs. Her interest Is in using the language of architecture, its materiality. Its relationship to a human being and moving the art context out from the Institutional site to 'Ihe site of the street". Where I come in as an artist is in this mixing of terms. A personal belief is that once things are defined, there's less room for movement. It's important in our culture to have art enter a community and inform everyone, not just the art-privileged. So I try to use familiar materials within our architectural environment and just changing what it looks like so that art does not become something so "placed on a pedestal" but is involved in the communicafion process for more people. It's not about not being definite. I'm very clear about what I'm doing. Within the different context it makes someone think, "Well this is not that, but it's like that." Does that answer your quesfion? Gary Wrench replied, "I think I conclude that we all have trouble defining the difference." Andrea Blum pointed out she did not have to deal with the pracfical, physical needs an architect does. Laurie Batter raised the issue expressed in the comment, "the artist didn't display a feel for the beach ambiance" and asked the artist to explain how the piece relates to the beach ambiance. Andrea stated she has lived at the beach during some of her adult life and recognizes the special beauty of this beach. The orientafion of the project is towards the ocean. The water in the project was designed to bring that connection to the ocean up to the blufftop level. If you look along the basin to the ocean. It's all on the same level. Also the light and shadow elements, the changing patterns are meant to express the progression of the day, which has always been part of my work. The piece addresses the day life and the night life as well as being structurally designed to orient itself towards the ocean. David Sammons outlined past comments on the charge the artist was given to create the separation between the street and the useful part of the pavilion and the need for the height. He asked about the section of railing that angles off from the north toward the west. Andrea Blum responded, "Let's put it this way. I would like to develop the landscape scheme and I realize that there is a restaurant there and I realize that the way it looks now is terrible. And I would like to first put the landscaping in before that particular secfion is removed. I think it determines...I mean, it's hard for me to say that, because I designed it as a way to enclose the space but I also understand that it's a problem for many of the people, and that's in fact where some of the argument came from. So I would like to have someone work on the landscape scheme. So the nofion of the rail on the Ocean Blvd. side as a facade gets worked into whatever happens with the landscape scheme and I would be open to discuss having that secfion of it taken down. Eric Larson clarified," So if one of the charges given the landscape architect is to attempt to do something that makes that section unnecessary, you're open to that as a potenfial artistically acceptable change." Andrea Blum responded. "I think so, yeah." Chairman Larson asked if there was any comment from the Committee on that particular aspect? Margaret Stanton said she understands the logic behind the abstract screen. Would it work if you had bars and the absence of bars, cut down the number and spaced them differently? Andrea Blum said she had considered that over the last several months and she feels strongly that the consistent rail draws less attention that if the rail was altered in that manner, where it becomes more decorative and the decorative element heightens tension. And what would change in the engineering? As a design alterafion it would become too self-conscious and she thinks it would be worse. With a more fecund landscape scheme, a lot of the hardness of the project, which seems to be the major concern, will get softened a lot. Meefing with Artist Andrea Blum Page 11 Margaret Stanton asked even ff was altered to one bar-no bar-one bar-no bar, evenly spaced. The artist replied "But then you miss out on the whole nofion of it, you're eliminafing one part of it. I've changed this piece for structural reasons during the course of it, and the landscaping I feel is a good solufion and considering the removal of that other section is a good solufion. I can't take the whole piece down, removing all of that, there's no piece left." David Sammons asked if she felt the same way when they eliminated for practical reasons some of the inifial things that were included. She responded that the change of the troughs to benches was negligible ('They are the same thing to me; I know that sounds a little sick"). The pavilion and the rail structure and the middle section is really the structural core of the piece and the through-to-bench is really a secondary design concern. David Sammons expressed that he has difficulty differenfiating between primary and secondary concerns and so do the people of Carisbad. Andrea Blum said she can understand that and that there are certain answers that make no sense, which might be her inability to communicate her feelings and sense of logic In her relafionship to the worid as an artist. At a certain point that becomes a personal conversafion that doesn't make sense on paper. Sammons asked her to explain the provision of her contract with the City which allowed for changes in the piece as the project advanced. Andrea asked for clarificafion: "You're asking what is written in my contract that gives permission to alter the design? He said yes, if you could just tell me exactly how that works as far as, as the piece goes on and you're allowed to make changes by how your overall work has changed. Andrea Blum stated that the work had not changed that much. The model of the piece sort of idenfically represents it. The architectural drawings didn't change. The only thing that did change was the surface pouring of the concrete, which didn't need drawings. Nothing really changed that's not on the drawings. David Sammons asked if the City had the drawings and Margaret Stanton said she was sure it did. He said the Pavilion is ten feet tall in the drawings, the props are gone in the drawings. Andrea pointed out that the pavilion is dropped one foot from the drawings, she doesn't know the exact inches, feet. David Sammons asked if inches and feet were Important to her and she responded yes. It's very Important to me. it's extremely important to me. it's so important that in fact I thought. This it too high. It doesn't need to be that high and I would like to drop it one foot.' And I spoke to Connie and I don't know if it's on the drawings or not." Eric Larson reminded the Committee of its charge to discuss artistically acceptable changes, that's all that they have been charged. They have discussed the railings, which is the largest item the community relates to. We've reached some consensus on thinner rails, if engineering- wise it works and we've talked about the north end based on the landscaping. Absent those ttA/o items, are there artisfically acceptable changes to you in the current appearance of the rails as they are there today? Andrea Blum asked, "In other words, do I want to take the whole piece down?" (Applause). Chairman Larson replied he wanted to make sure that we fulfill our charge and make a concise response to the Arts Commission that there is no question left unasked. And I just wanted to ask that specifically. Laurie Batter asked to add to that the possible painting of the railings. Some people had indicated that if it was a different color it might seem less obstructive. Is that acceptable to you? Andrea Blum replied that part of the reason for not painting it is that paint can be scraped off. There's a coating process and it looks tacky, because it makes it much more prominent. Eric Larson returned to his question. "It's very obvious to you that the rails are what have brought us together, not the diameter of the rails or the railing at the north end." Meefing with Artist Andrea Blum Page 12 The artist responded that she thinks no matter what she had done or someone else had done, they would have been here today. Gary Wrench asked for her answer to the quesfion posed. Andrea Blum said, "Yes, I will change the landscaping. Is that the question posed?" She said she's not sure she understands. Eric Larson Itemized that they had discussed the height, the spacings, he was asking for the precise answer for the Arts Commission. Andrea Blum asked, "Do you want me to say that the removal of the rail and the pavilion is not acceptable to me as an artist? Is that what you want me to answer?" Eric Larson said yes, we need to ask you what the artisfically acceptable changes are; if there are none. Andrea Blum stated the artistically acceptable changes are to change the landscaping and, once the landscaping is changed, to look at the north end rails, which I would consider strongly removing. Those are the artistic changes. Chairman Larson asked the Committee for quesfions or comments. He stated that he thinks they have explored fairly well the subjects required. He had a couple of other quesfions and said they appreciated her bluntness concerning the artisfically acceptable changes. He asked if there would be any considerafion on her part for a redesign of the project? Andrea Blum replied, "No. Part of the reason is that I spend many months working on this and over the course of five years have thought about it a great deal. And I must say that though I respect the input from the community, I have been harassed at my home at night, I have had mail, I really have been mistreated as a person, which is different in some ways than just the art. And I think it's really been unfortunate and part of my reason. I would not redesign something that I've already designed." Eric Larson replied. "I would like to apologize for the City of Carlsbad in the fact that those things have happened to you. because I think it's really a shame. It is really not typical of the way the City of Carisbad does business and it's really unfortunate that people felt compelled to make those comments. It's very unfortunate that people felt compelled to pass around a person's home phone number knowing full well that the only intenfion of that was harassment, when the reality is we hired you to do a job, we gave you some criteria to perform that work and the work was done. And if there is a problem with the work and acceptance in the community, that's something we have to deal with as a community, and we will. We'll work our way through this and we'll deal with it, and we're not too sure what the solution to that is. But I really feel bad that the personal portion of that took place and I hope you accept our apology and that the people who did that would think better of such an activity the next fime around, because there was nothing personal about it. It was a business contract bettA/een the City and yourself to perform the work." But the reason for the redesign question was, if you had the opportunity to start from ground zero, if there was something else that you might have thought of, in the fime that's passed, with that site, or any changes that might take place. You've explained how all these elements work together. Andrea Blum said that there may be five or six different ideas at first, and the artist gradually focuses on one. Regarding redesign, she just thinks she couldn't do that here. Eric Larson noted that the work does have an architectural impact on the community and invited other Committee comments. David Sammons stated that he appreciated the artist's time, interest and concern for the situafion here. His own role on the Committee in represenfing the citizens of Carlsbad: in ttA/enty-five years he's seen a lot of things change; this process is by no means over, and he asks her to take back with her a consideration that Carlsbad is a way of life. There is a certain feeling and reason why people come to Carlsbad. Meefing with Andrea Blum Page 13 In North County we are the gem, the shining star, no other city can compete with the sense of community here. Secondly, remember how close we are to our coast. All of us who live here go to the beach. It's an Important part of our life. Understand also that maybe you are in a unique situafion with your piece in that you're in direct competifion down there in art with probably the greatest artist this or any other worid has ever known. As Carlsbad people, we're used to seeing that sunset on the ocean every night and saying, "Look where I live. Look what I've got" every night. People on the other coast and the midwest don't have that. These are some of the thinkings that go into the mindset of Carisbad people. I hope that as this process continues that you will keep that factor in mind. I know a lot of that thinking went into your thought process in the design of it. But it's different when you've lived here, and live here full fime. Try and keep an open mind. We understand what you were charged to do, we understand you did it. I hope that some sort of an equitable arrangement can be worked out. Andrea Blum responded that she thinks she has kept an open mind about this situation. She thinks that "you sfill have your sunset, the whole piece is directed towards the ocean, the whole thing is about framing the ocean, framing that vista, allowing a seafing area for people to do what they like there. I didn't take that away. One piece of art in a community is just one piece of art. And it can't solve all the problems your community has. I think there has been this overemphasis on art. There are so many other issues. This is not a brick wall in front of your ocean." David Sammons replied that if public art is put up and the public has a problem with It and there isn't some kind of dialogue bettA/een the public and the artist and some room to move each way, public art is going to go the way of the buggy whip. That would really be a shame. You have an opportunity to be on the cutting edge here. Everything we seem to read is The Artist Against the Public. You have an opportunity here to try to work with us. Andrea Blum responded that she is trying to work with them and maintain her own integrity at the same fime. The sixty-odd people here each have a different opinion about what they'd really like to see there. You can't please everyone, you can't get a consensus, especially with art. Margaret Stanton stated that she admires Andrea for coming out here to meet with us and for trying to work with us. You could have remained in New York City and said. It's going to remain as It's designed and built. But you came out and you've been willing to meet and to agree to some changes. I want you to know I appreciate that. Gary Wrench seconded that comment and stated that he found Andrea reasonable and articulate. He felt that she listened and thanked her for her openness and fiexibility to the extent her artistic integrity permits. Eric Larson thanked the artist for her fime and turned to the Committee business of the report. Gary Wrench said he wanted to think about the meefing and perhaps convene another. Eric Larson said the Committee would need to make sure they all agreed on the contents of the report and to select a spokesperson. The Arts Commission meets May 7. Discussion concerned Committee members' schedules and the meefing was scheduled for Wednesday, April 29th at 4:00 p.m. Eric Larson pointed out that since it is a public process he wanted interested people to know when and where it would take place. The Committee adjourned at 10:50 am. Connie Beardsley Arts Manager "For from the Carlsbad Sister City Committee" "For ^from the Carlsbad Sister City COmmittee" "For from the Carlsbad Sister City Committee" "For from the Carlsbad Sister City Committee" "For ^from the Carlsbad Sister City Committee" "For ^from the Carlsbad Sister City Committee"