Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-05-04; Split Pavilion Committee Ad Hoc; MinutesTRANSCRIPT Split Pavilion Committee Meefing Monday, May 4 - 1992, 4:00 PM City Council Conference Room 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad Meefing was convened at 4:00 p.m. Present: Eric Larson, Margaret Stanton, Laurie Batter, David Sammons, Gary Wrench Chair Larson asked Committee Members if they had an opportunity to look at the transcript of April 22,1992. 'There are some lines in the transcript that could not be deciphered from the tape - what was actually said in those particular instances. Does anyone have a comment on the transcript? I assume as we decided at our last meefing, that we would provide the Arts Commission with a full transcript of our meeting with Andrea [April 16 transcript] and that we would also be providing the Commission with the transcript of the 22nd as well for the Commission to use." Mr. Larson the moved to next item on the agenda. Review and approval of the Committee's Report Chair Larson briefiy outlined the main sections in the report. "Do you have a copy of this Gary? It's dated April 27." Mr. Wrench replied that he did not have a copy of the report. Mr. Larson stated the Committee would go through it item by item. Mr. Wrench responded, "Having not received one, 1 spent a fair amount of time yesterday drafting one. Its kind of a waste of time, I guess." Ms. Stanton asked if she could begin. Mr. Larson stated, "We'll begin with the beginning, and its enfified 'Report of the Split Pavilion Committee'." Ms. Stanton stated, "I should begin by saying I think it's very well laid out with the 'acceptable' and 'non acceptable'. It's very easy to read this way. I would like to propose that the Committee think about adding at the very beginning of the report, a restatement of the charge that was given to this Committee by the Arts Commission." Ms. Larson replied, "Margaret has had copies of this prepared based on her suggesfion." Copies were handed to Committee Members. Ms. Stanton stated, "I think maybe it might go right after the first sentence. Where we state, 'The charge of the Committee was to 1) communicate community response to the artwork; 2) seek a re-examination by the artist and the subcommittee of the design and materials of the landscape plantings and other issues and; 3) seek the artist's cooperafion in defining artistically acceptable changes.'." Mr. Larson asked, "So that would be part of this paragraph then?" Split Pavilion Committee 2 Transcript May 4, 1992 Ms. Stanton responded, "I think that might follow the first sentence, 'The Committee, consisting of Chairperson Eric Larson and members Margaret Stanton, David Sammons, Laurie Batter and Gary Wrench met with artist Andrea Blum on April 16, 1992.' and then if you insert, 'The charge...'." Chair Larson asked if there were any comments or addifions to the first paragraph. "Then we go into what's listed as acceptable changes. The first one is a change in the landscaping. What's listed here are willingness to change and what things can be done and then excerpts from the transcript supporting what is there." Ms. Stanton stated, "Which I think is good, 'cause then you don't just have our interpretation." Mr. Larson asked if this met everyone's expectations or concerns on the change of the landscaping. He stated the Committee would take more fime if Mr. Wrench needed it Mr. Larson then moved to Secfion No. 2 of the report. 'Removal of the section of rails at the north end of the artwork, running east to west' Ms. Stanton stated, "I would like to delete the word 'Remove.' No. 1 talks about the landscaping to be consistent. Maybe No. 1 should be 'Landscaping', No. 2 should be 'Secfion of rails at north end of artwork'; and that tells what you want to do with them and then the bottom one is 'Rails' and tells what we can do with them. Not to make the decision - to make a statement on what it is." Mr. Larson clarified that Ms. Stanton's proposed changes on Section No. 2. "Let someone else draw the conclusion." Ms. Stanton stated, "I think you want to do that with 'landscaping' as well." Chair Larson replied, "So let's walk back to landscaping and just call it landscaping." Ms. Stanton further stated she had another change within that secfion (referring to Section No. 2). "As I was reading this, I felt that the very last paragraph where it reads, 'Andrea Blum stated the artistically acceptable changes are to change the landscaping and, once the landscaping is changed to look at the north end north end rails...', applies to the rails. So it should really be moved to the third category right up at the top right. That's what we're talking about here. And then the secfion that starts with, 'The artist agreed to look at a narrow diameter bar...' ending with her second quote where it says, '...but was also safe so that your head cannot get caught in it and also be structural.' That whole section I think should move." Mr. Larson stated. "You've got this and then these two supporting paragraphs all go below" Ms. Stanton clarified, "I think they go under 'Rails', because it's the general rails not just the north end rails." Mr. Larson asked, "Does everyone have that then? Under No. 2, we've got the first comment and then we've got ttA/o quotes and then the second comment beginning with 'The artist..', and split Pavilion Committee 3 Transcript May 4, 1992 then the next two supporting quotes underneath that all go down to under No. 3, under 'Rails'. Because those talk to diameter in the structure." Ms. Batter asked if those would be placed in the report. "Would you put them before or after? Do we need an opening comment or statement about this section on the rails?" Mr. Wrench replied, "I think just before the paragraph on 'Workmanship' begins. The Committee agreed to place the section there. Chair Larson asked if Committee Members had anything else to change under Secfion No. 2. Mr. Wrench asked if it was clearly the intent of the artist that the rails be removed or modified. "I could actually visualize cutting them down so they became a hand-hold rather than a..." Mr. Larson responded, "It seems to me that all the discussion was removal. I have to refer back to the original transcript But it seems to me that what we talked about was complete removal." Ms. Stanton asked, "For that one secfion?" Mr. Larson answered, "For that one secfion. I don't' think there was a discussion with modification of those." Ms. Batter agreed and the Committee talked about removal. Mr. Sammons stated, "It says taken down. That means taken down." (referring to the transcript). Mr. Wrench agreed. "I can imagine actually that it would be in everybody's interest to see it cut down to 8 inches high and put a top rail on it. You take it down you have the problem of how you finish the concrete and how you implement the finish. You torch them all off right at the concrete then you've got the problem of finishing. Whereas, if they're finished fiat then you've got skateboarding on the top of it. Whereas, if you torched it off at four inches above and rewelded a top rail it might actually be better for everybody." Ms. Batter commented, "I thought maybe that was part of her consideration on the landscaping. What was going to happen there before she decided how to handle that." Mr. Larson stated, "She said removal is what she would consider. And her comments were so strong about if there are rails there, eight foot rails, the height of the pavilion. But I understand what you're talking about [referring to Mr. Wrench's comments] as far as the finish of the concrete." Mr. Wrench stated, "It can say 'removed' as far as I'm concerned." Mr. Larson also stated, "My preference would be to leave it because she used the word removal." Ms. Stanton agreed. Split Pavilion Committee 4 Transcript May 4, 1992 Mr. Larson confinued, "If a landscape plan does get changed and installed, perhaps that would be a consideration then. Okay, under No. 3 'Rails' we wanted it set up as acceptable and not acceptable. Does everyone agree?" Ms. Stanton replied, "The very last under 'Not Acceptable' is 'complete or partial delefion of the bars', we might want to put in parenthesis 'with the exception of the section at the north end'." Mr. Wrench interjected, "It won't hurt to say, 'except as specified and to above'." Ms. Stanton agreed and stated she liked that. Mr. Larson asked for comments. "The next section would be what we moved down from item No. 2 but we've already talked about that, and then we have 'Workmanship'. And her comment on the workmanship which she said several times was on the finish work of the concrete. I'm not to sure where that fits into all of this, but it was a comment she made and we'll include it in the report." Ms. Stanton felt that it should stay in the report. Mr. Larson asked for comments under Secfion No. 4. "If not, Margaret you have another item you wanted to add." Ms. Stanton stated, "I was thinking of closing with some words for the Arts Commission, and I rethought this. What you have here on No. 2 [referring to addifional comments to the report]. 1 would like to propose a change to." Mr. Larson clarified, "A change to what you've already proposed." Ms. Stanton replied, "What I've already proposed. My change would be, 'The Committee was appointed to fact find and determine artistically acceptable changes. The report of this Committee In no way limits the Arts Commission in formulating its recommendafions to the City Council.' I think basically to let the Commission know that we did what we were asked to do and they take this as part of their discussions in formulating whatever recommendation they're going to make to the City Council and it doesn't have to be exactly what's in this report." Mr. Larson asked Ms. Stanton to read the statement again. She did. Mr. Larson stated, "That's fine. I think the Arts Commission understands that, but at least it will be come a part of the written report. Is this acceptable? It would go in the report then as a closing. This statement would replace where it currently states in the report 'The Committee respectfully submits this report...' That's going to go away and will be replaced by this No. 2. Are there any comments? Gary, in consideration of the work that you've already done and have there, are there things, I know we've gone through this fairly quickly, but there may have been something we've missed." Mr. Wrench stated, "I said basically the same thing. I broke into acceptable and unacceptable. split Pavilion Committee 5 Transcript May 4, 1992 Mr. Wrench stated, "I said basically the same thing. I broke into acceptable and unacceptable. And a point that I did add that was sort of in response to the question you had asked was, would she be willing to make other changes. And she in fact said "No.' And it seems like that was a relevant thing to include." Mr. Larson responded, "That was the definitive thing she said. Maybe we ought to pull that out of the transcript and put it under this acceptable and unacceptable changes section. Because actually the acceptable and unacceptable has no quotes per se as the others do. And I think what she said pretty well sums it up. I think in that same paragraph, and I don't have the transcript here, she says something to the fact, do you want me to say what's acceptable or something like that, and she says I'll do this and do that." Mr. Wrench stated it was on the top of page 15. The last line on page 14 and the last sentence of the paragraph on page 15. Mr. Larson read from the report, "'I would not redesign something that I've already designed.' Not to pull anything out of context, I think we take the whole paragraph leading with the quesfion, would there be any consideration on the part for redesign of the project." The Committee agreed to place this under the acceptable/ unacceptable category. Ms. Stanton asked Mr. Larson how he was going to structure this. Mr. Wrench responded "Under the 'Non Acceptable' you could perhaps summarize by saying that a summary statement is, a complete redesign as not acceptable. Mr. Larson replied, "Yeah, we've got 'Not Acceptable' we've got the pieces here. And then that comment is the full redesign." Mr. Wrench further stated, "And then you could quote as substantiation of that as you have for the partial deletion or as it relates the smaller bars." Ms. Stanton stated she was worried where that statement was going to go. Discussion centered on where to place this item. Mr. Larson commented, "The first thing we moved goes under the 'Acceptable' under 'smaller diameter bar'. That's an acceptable change, even though she does have some negative comments. Under the unacceptable, we state full redesign of the project with the supporting comments underneath it. Ms Batter asked if the Committee thought there would be any merit to footnoting where the quotations are picked up from the transcript on the report so as the Arts Commission goes through this they can pick it up. The Committee agreed this would be helpful. Split Pavilion Committee 6 Transcript May 4, 1992 Chair Larson asked for further comments. "That will consfitute our comments to the Arts Commission. Any comments or ideas on how we will make our presentation to the Arts Commission. We have two Arts Commissioners who will be sitting as the Arts Commission so it falls upon the three of us - one of the three to actually make the report to the Commission." Ms. Stanton stated Mr. Larson should make the presentation. Mr. Larson agreed to make the presentafion. Mr. Wrench stated, "This is in the Commission's hands before the meefing. It might be sufficient to simply ask if there are quesfions." Chair Larson stated, "It's not my intent to go over this in the Commission report point by point at all. " Mr. Wrench further responded, "I'd let the written text stand on its own." Mr. Larson stated, "I'd make some simple observations and just a reference to the fact that everyone's been provided with a full text of the transcript." Ms. Stanton asked Mr. Larson if he would like all the Committee Members to be there for quesfions. Discussion centered on the place and fime of the Arts Commission meefing and what was on the agenda. Mr. Wrench asked that an addition to the final statement of the report be added which states "..April 16 meefing transcript, a copy of which is appended to and forms a part of this report." A copy of the full transcript forms a part of the Committee's report. Meefing adjourned at 4:30 p.m.