Agenda of Public Art Panel Meeting

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

What is a “Conflict of Interests” - A conflict of interests can be of two types:

Pecuniary - an interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person or another person with whom the person is associated.

Non-pecuniary – a private or personal interest that a Council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Local Government Act (eg. A friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a financial nature).

Remoteness – a person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to a matter or if the interest is of a kind specified in Section 448 of the Local Government Act.

Who has a Pecuniary Interest? - a person has a pecuniary interest in a matter if the pecuniary interest is the interest of the person, or another person with whom the person is associated (see below).

Relatives, Partners - a person is taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter if:

§ The person’s spouse or de facto partner or a relative of the person has a pecuniary interest in the matter, or

§ The person, or a nominee, partners or employer of the person, is a member of a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter.

N.B. “Relative”, in relation to a person means any of the following:

(a) the parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descends or adopted child of the person or of the person’s spouse;

(b) the spouse or de facto partners of the person or of a person referred to in paragraph (a)

No Interest in the Matter - however, a person is not taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter:

§ If the person is unaware of the relevant pecuniary interest of the spouse, de facto partner, relative or company or other body, or

§ Just because the person is a member of, or is employed by, the Council.

§ Just because the person is a member of, or a delegate of the Council to, a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter provided that the person has no beneficial interest in any shares of the company or body.

Disclosure and participation in meetings

§ A Councillor or a member of a Council Committee who has a pecuniary interest in any matter with which the Council is concerned and who is present at a meeting of the Council or Committee at which the matter is being considered must disclose the nature of the interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.

§ The Councillor or member must not be present at, or in sight of, the meeting of the Council or Committee:

(a) at any time during which the matter is being considered or discussed by the Council or Committee, or

(b) at any time during which the Council or Committee is voting on any question in relation to the matter.

No Knowledge - a person does not breach this Clause if the person did not know and could not reasonably be expected to have known that the matter under consideration at the meeting was a matter in which he or she had a pecuniary interest.

Participation in Meetings Despite Pecuniary Interest (S 452 Act)

A Councillor is not prevented from taking part in the consideration or discussion of, or from voting on, any of the matters/questions detailed in Section 452 of the Local Government Act.

Non-pecuniary Interests - Must be disclosed in meetings.

There are a broad range of options available for managing conflicts & the option chosen will depend on an assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of the interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with. Non-pecuniary conflicts of interests must be dealt with in at least one of the following ways:

§ It may be appropriate that no action be taken where the potential for conflict is minimal. However, Councillors should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict does not exist.

§ Limit involvement if practical (eg. Participate in discussion but not in decision making or vice-versa). Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.

§ Remove the source of the conflict (eg. Relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the conflict)

§ Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the provisions in S451 of the Local Government Act apply (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary interest)

RECORDING OF VOTING ON PLANNING MATTERS

Clause 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 – Recording of voting on planning matters

(1) In this section, planning decision means a decision made in the exercise of a function of a council under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

(a) including a decision relating to a development application, an environmental planning instrument, a development control plan or a development contribution plan under that Act, but

(b) not including the making of an order under Division 2A of Part 6 of that Act.

(2) The general manager is required to keep a register containing, for each planning decision made at a meeting of the council or a council committee, the names of the councillors who supported the decision and the names of any councillors who opposed (or are taken to have opposed) the decision.

(3) For the purpose of maintaining the register, a division is required to be called whenever a motion for a planning decision is put at a meeting of the council or a council committee.

(4) Each decision recorded in the register is to be described in the register or identified in a manner that enables the description to be obtained from another publicly available document, and is to include the information required by the regulations.

(5) This section extends to a meeting that is closed to the public.

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services

Report No. 4.1 Progress Report - Railway Park Public Art Project

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

Claire McGarry, Place Manager - Byron Bay

File No: I2019/472

Summary:

Council has commissioned a work by artist Giovanni Veronesi for the upgrade of Railway Park, Byron Bay.

This report details the:

· Learnings from the Bayshore Drive Roundabout Project and how they’ve been applied to the management of this commission

· The design, manufacture and installation process for the artwork

· Integration with Railway Park construction program and timeframes

· Location of artwork

· Refinement of artwork design – form and materials

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the Public Art Panel notes the report and suspends meeting business to receive a presentation from the artist – Giovanni Veronesi.

2. That the Public Art Panel provides feedback to the artist on proposed refinement to the work – form and materials.

Attachments:

1 Gionvanni Veronesi Public Art Program and Key Milestones Railway Park, E2019/28547 , page 7⇩

REPORT

A presentation was made by Plummer and Smith to the Public Art Panel Extraordinary meeting in May 2018 and a subsequent report was provided to the August Public Art Panel meeting regarding plans for Public Art in the redeveloped Railway Park. The Public Art Panel shortlisted the artists that had responded to an Expression of Interest process at its August 2018 meeting and selected the final artwork at the October 2018 meeting. Council subsequently resolved (18-769) to grant the commission for the Railway Park Public Art Project to UAP Australia Pty Ltd with the artist Giovanni Veronesi.

A contract is now signed and a media release about the project was distributed early March 2019.

Learnings from Bayshore Drive Roundabout

Learnings from the Bayshore Drive Roundabout Project are being applied to the management of the Railway Park Public Art Project including:

· The principal contractor for construction of Railway Park is Greenwoods, who are required to provide written agreements with all sub-contractors regarding programming, installation, accessibility, site condition etc.

· An additional presentation to the Public Art Panel on 9^th May (this meeting) to allow the artist to talk through process.

· Creation of a Project Control Group including Council staff, Project Manager, Landscape Architect with experience in Public Art (Dan Plummer). Tracking of artwork progress and management is a standing agenda item for this meeting.

· Allocation of funding for Project Manager and Landscape Architect to visit artist’s workshop during manufacture phase to ensure consistency from concept to manufacture

Project timeframes and key milestones

UAP Australia Pty Ltd has provided a construction program for the artwork (see Attachment) which details key milestones, including:

· Technical design

· Fabrication

· Installation

· Handover

These timeframes align with the overall construction program for Railway Park.

Location of artwork

Following discussions with the Public Art Panel, the Byron Bay Town Centre Masterplan Guidance Group, the landscape architect for Railway Park and the artist, the decision regarding location of the artwork within the park will be deferred until the park upgrade is constructed.

At this point in time, the project team, PAP and Masterplan Group will have the opportunity to view the upgraded site and make recommendations on where the artwork might be best placed.

Refinement of artwork design

A request has been received from the artist to consider a refined artwork form, specifically related to the shape of each of the individual “pieces” that make up the artwork as a whole.

At the same time, members of the Public Art Panel have raised questions regarding the suitability of the material for the commissioned artwork.

The presentation from Mr Veronesi that accompanies this report will speak to the refined form and answer any questions from the panel regarding materials.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1

Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Public Art Policy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Strategy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria – last reviewed in October 2014.

Financial Considerations

The Railway Park upgrade project, including the public art components is being funded from paid parking (drainage works) and Section 94 Developer Contributions.

Consultation and Engagement

Railway Park project team

Byron Bay Town Centre Masterplan Guidance Group

Giovanni Veronesi (the artist)

Report No. 4.2 The Lighthouse Project - Bayshore Drive Roundabout

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2019/474

Summary:

Council resolved to invite the artist to submit further information, including images, for the Public Art Panel to consider, showing what The Lighthouse work would look like when complete. This report provides a refresh of key information for the Public Art Panel to consider when making its recommendation to Council.

Please note the artist is unable to produce the drawings/images in time for them to be circulated with this report. They are expected to be available 24 hours in advance of the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Public Art Panel recommends to Council:

1. Option 1 - To proceed with the proposed works on The Lighthouse based on the drawings and images provided by the artist for the following reasons:

a) ……..

b) …….

2. Option 2 - To not proceed with any further works on The Lighthouse sculpture.

3. Option 3 – Placeholder for an alternative recommendation should the Panel wish to recommend another option.

REPORT

A report providing the learnings from the Bayshore Drive Roundabout Public Art Project and possible future options for The Lighthouse was provided to the Council meeting on 28 February 2019.

Council resolved (19-061) in part to:

1. Implements the learnings and improvements to the Public Art process identified in this report via a review of the Public Art Guidelines and Criteria.

2. Proceed with Option 1 as set out in the staff report, of allowing the artist to complete the works, if the conditions as detailed in the report are met; but subject to the matter being reconsidered by Council before the option is implemented.

3. Resolves to fund costs up to $2000 from the Public Art Panel budget accordingly.

Option 1 (which is referred to in point 2 above) includes:

· that the artist be invited to submit information including images (Photoshop photos and/or drawings) for the Public Art Panel to consider, showing what the work will look like when complete,

· That final go ahead for any further work on The Lighthouse sculpture is subject to:

1. the Panel being satisfied that the proposed work will deliver an improved outcome and if they are, they will submit a report to Council

2. Council will then need to resolve to support the recommendation to have the work undertaken

· If further work is given the go ahead, it will be a variation to, or continuation of the existing contract.

· Council allocated funds to pay for Corey’s flight and accommodation to attend a Public Art Panel meeting to discuss the proposed finishing touches to the artwork (up to $2000 – given that at this stage we’re unsure whether he will be asked to travel up more than once).

The artist will provide drawings and images for circulation to the Public Art Panel members prior to the meeting. He has elected not to attend the meeting but is happy to answer questions following the meeting in writing. In lieu of attending the meeting, Corey requested that approximately $750 of the $2000 allocated in the Council resolution be used to engage a graphic designer to provide the required drawings and images, which was approved by management.

The Public Art Panel is requested to consider and provide advice to Council on whether to accept the proposed works to The Lighthouse and progress towards implementation (Option 1) or not to accept the proposal and leave the sculpture in its current state (Option 2), or to present a third option if it considers there is a further viable alternative.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1

Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Public Art Policy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Strategy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria – last reviewed in October 2014.

Financial Considerations

Costs associated with Option 1 - Further Work:

Although the artist is prepared to cover his own living costs, an estimated $32,000-$45,000 will be required to complete the work. The estimate assumes completion takes 5 days and includes traffic control, site safety and supervision, elevated work platform and contingencies. The upper estimate range includes the cost of an experienced arts consultant. The estimate assumes work is completed during normal working hours (not overnight).

Note that the artist said earlier that he believes he can complete the work in 3 days, however the extra 2 have been added to the estimate as a contingency in case of unforeseen delays (e.g. adverse weather).

This funding cannot come from S7.12 as that is now fully committed (Railway Square). However it has been identified that funding would be able to be drawn from either the Byron Bay town centre reserve or the Rural South Catchment reserve by resolution of Council.

Costs associated with Option 2 – leave as is:

Nil

Consultation and Engagement

Artist – Corey Thomas

Report No. 4.3 Public Art Guidelines and Criteria - review and update

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2019/528

Summary:

Following the adoption of the Public Art Strategy in August 2018, the next step in establishing a more strategic approach to public art management is to review the Public Art Guidelines and Criteria, other documentation and the public art process. Key learnings from the Bayshore Drive Roundabout Public Art Project and other sources of improvements will be applied throughout this review process.

This report outlines key considerations and proposes a way forward.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the Public Art Panel notes the contents of the report.

2. That the following steps are taken in preparation for a report to the Public Art Panel at the next meeting on 12^th September:

a) A review of current Public Art Guidelines and Criteria, including consideration of existing best practice, and a new draft prepared

b) Specialist advice sought, if applicable.

c) Amendments proposed for other documentation and process review for consideration by Public Art Panel

REPORT

Background information

Acknowledging that a more strategic approach to managing public art in Byron Shire was needed, the Public Art Panel developed a Public Art Strategy which was adopted by Council in August 2018.

The process for establishing a more strategic approach for public art in Byron Shire is:

ü Review how other local government areas manage public art and obtain advice from the new Public Art Panel;

ü Review the Public Art Policy;

ü Develop a Public Art Strategy to identify the strategic direction for public art in the Shire;

· WE ARE HERE

1. Review the Public Art Guidelines and Criteria;

2. Review the process and materials for artists in applying for public art projects.

The Bayshore Drive Roundabout Public Art Project and the Railway Park Public Art Project were both undertaken under the new Public Art Strategy. The learnings from the Bayshore Drive Roundabout Public Art Project will inform a review of the Public Art Guidelines and Criteria and the process and materials for artists in applying for public art commissions.

In addition, other key sources of information will assist in the development of comprehensive public art documentation and processes:

· Suggested changes as recommended by Public Artworks Pty Ltd during the development of the Public Art Strategy;

· Staff and PAP experience in the commissioning process; and

· Relevant Council resolutions.

Key considerations

Bayshore Drive

The Bayshore Drive Roundabout public art commission was the first large scale public art commission undertaken by Council and supported by the Public Art Panel (PAP). It was an ambitious, high profile commission.

Having considered the end-to-end project process, learnings and improvements can be broken into three distinct stages of the commissioning process:

· Calls for Expressions of Interest

· Design and Construction

· Installation

Improving documentation, including contracts, relevant to each stage was a specific focal point.

Key learnings from this project were outlined in a draft report presented to the Public Art Panel in January 2019 and later to Council at its 28 February 2019 meeting.

Public Art Strategy

Whilst developing the Public Art Strategy, Public Artworks Pty Ltd provided comments on suggested changes to the Public Art Guidelines and Criteria considering the new Strategy. Broadly this includes:

· Split the Guidelines into 1) The Guidelines & 2) the Pro Forma documents which form the Appendices.

· Improve the description of the roles and responsibilities for ‘The Curator’ at 4.4.

· Added on 6.2 Artist Selection, the option for Council to begin an EOI process from a selection of artists.

· Remove the community consultation from the concept development phase in 6.3.

· Remove the section 7.5 re public consultation.

· Provided considerable suggestions for changes to the criteria for decommissioning artwork.

· Taken the lengthy description of the installation process out of the Guidelines which now appears as a Pro forma document, as these specifics will be referred to or included in any art brief.

Practical experience

In practice, staff identified the following challenges in implementing current Guidelines and Criteria:

· In dealing with artists around the process outlined in the Guidelines it has been identified that the current ‘one process fits all’ is onerous when dealing with ‘community art’ projects, such as murals on walls and other small projects. Staff have identified that there needs to be one process for dealing with small community art projects, and a different process for high end strategic public art projects. One suggestion is that the Public Art Panel focusses on the high end, strategic public art direction and projects, and that an internal staff group manage small scale, low budget community art projects in alignment with organisational strategic planning.

· Management of murals/ street art/ graffiti could benefit from further clarification.

To support the review of documentation, the following points also require consideration and decisions:

1. Consider appointing an experienced public art consultant to facilitate and project manage high profile public art commissions from the EOI stage through to installation.

2. Ensure meeting processes and schedules for PAP and PAP subcommittees are clearly defined and agreed and sufficient for the business to be transacted

Council resolutions

Recent Council resolutions also requiring consideration include:

Resolution (19-054) in part:

Review the Public Art Commissioning Agreement/Contract so that it provides an effective control mechanism - e.g. separation of concept, design development and design documentation, with clearly defined Council approval/rejection mechanisms at each of these stages. To this end, consider employing the assistance (pro bono or otherwise) of an arts lawyer with expertise in Public Art Commissions to ensure any contract documentation in future is fit for purpose.

Resolution 19-061 in part:

5. Council, in conjunction with local arts organisation, run a workshop or series of workshops to assist local artists in up skilling in the Expression of Interest application process and their ability to meet the selection criteria.

6. That staff investigate potential ways to increase the weighting of local artists in the selection criteria in future Expression of Interest processes and bring a report to both the Public Art Panel and Council in relation to this.

Next steps

Preliminary research has provided the following information that may be helpful in framing consideration of budgeting and guidelines for commissioning public art.

How much does good public art cost? Some examples from A.C.T. https://www.abc.net.au/news/specials/curious-canberra/2016-04-25/public-art-in-canberra-costs/7328574

Government of Western Australia, Department of Culture and the Arts Public Art Commissioning Guidelines https://www.dca.wa.gov.au/Documents/Developing%20Arts%20and%20Culture/Spaces%20and%20Places/Public_Art/Documents/Public%20Art_Guidelines_FINAL.pdf

It is proposed that the following steps are taken in preparation for a report to the Public Art Panel at the next meeting on 12^th September:

a) A review of current Public Art Guidelines and Criteria, including consideration of existing best practice, and a new draft prepared

b) Specialist advice sought if appropriate

c) Amendments proposed for other documentation and process review for consideration by Public Art Panel

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1

Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Public Art Policy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Strategy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria – last reviewed in October 2014.

Financial Considerations

Nil

Consultation and Engagement

As outlined in the report.

Report No. 4.4 Public Art Conservation and Maintenance

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2019/473

Summary:

One of the key strategies outlined in the Public Art Strategy is improve Council’s conservation and maintenance practices for currently owned public artworks across the Shire. This report describes the work that has commenced and proposed next steps.

Secondly the Panel is asked to consider decommissioning or relocating the remaining sculptures at Bangalow Sports Fields.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Public Art Panel:

1. Notes the work undertaken so far to record Public Artworks in Council’s Asset Management System.

2. Notifies staff of any other artworks that may not be captured in the Asset Management System.

3. Notes that a report will be provided to the next scheduled Public Art Panel meeting regarding a proposed maintenance program and budget.

4. Recommends to Council either decommissioning or relocating, the four remaining sculptures at the Bangalow Sports Fields, and allocates up to $5,000 from the public art budget for this task.

Attachments:

1 List of Public Art on Asset Management System April 2019, E2019/28058 , page 22 ⇩

REPORT

The Public Art Strategy recognises the need to improve Council’s conservation and maintenance practices for public artworks.

The Strategy states:

“Repairing, removing and sometimes relocating artworks is central in a public art program. Damaged or unmaintained artwork presents a neglectful public image of the Shire.

There are clear cost benefits in a regular maintenance regime that may also include re-contextualising artworks to better locations.

Where possible, artists should be approached to repair damaged artworks. Other artworks, which have deteriorated beyond repair, or that have been poorly located should be removed. For example the sculptures at Bangalow Oval, poorly located and without context, should all be decommissioned.

Most public art has a natural lifespan. No matter how well intentioned a commissioning process is in minimising deterioration – paint fades, surfaces fail, and community sentiment can change. Once artwork is placed on the Public Art Register, council has an obligation to maintain the work properly. At the point at which the cost of doing so outweighs the benefit, the Public Art Panel is to be consulted, and a decision made on decommissioning.”

The current Public Art Guidelines and Criteria state:

· Council accepts that making provision for proper upkeep, maintenance and minimisation of vandalism includes the requirement for forward identification and cost planning of the progressively increasing annual cost of public art maintenance as the number of commissioned works grows.

· Whilst artwork donated to or commissioned by Council is owned and managed by Council, in all cases, the artist should have the first option to carry out repairs or recommend an appropriate repairer.

· One means of continuing to commission artists for works of art in public places without escalating annual costs for maintenance and vandalism prevention is the decommissioning of work after a specific time period, usually five or ten years.

· The Public Art Panel will be responsible for reviewing Council’s public artworks collection and for implementing any decommissioning process;

· The Panel will be required to consult with individuals with the relevant qualifications and/or expertise prior to making a decision to decommission public artworks

· A process for decommissioning artworks is outlined in the Guidelines.

Consideration should be given to the situation in which artwork is placed. If vandalism and graffiti are to be avoided, the general area needs to be maintained, for example, no bins, keep the gardens maintained etc.

Progress

All known public artworks that are outdoors in public spaces have been mapped and added to Council’s Asset Management database with the intention that they are regularly inspected and maintained like any other Council asset. The list (Attachment 1) contains 54 active or proposed sculptures/ outdoor artworks (note not including murals).

Council’s artworks are valued every five years for insurance purposes.

Public Art Panel members are requested to let staff know if there are any artworks they are aware of that are missing from this list.

Further work is required on the process for how artwork is maintained and in devising a maintenance budget to pay for the upkeep of existing public art assets.

The first next step is that all mapped artworks will be inspected to understand their condition. This will allow staff to develop an indicative proposed annual budget allocation for conservation and maintenance.

Murals

Murals have not yet been mapped in Council’s system because the actual physical asset is the wall they are painted on and therefore it is not clear how to categorise the mural – whether as an asset itself, or ‘part of’ the underlying asset. In addition, maintenance of murals usually requires a specialist as they cannot be simply ‘touched up’ by anyone. Nor has their status as permanent or temporary art been defined by Council.

Staff would welcome the Public Art Panel’s input and guidance on these aspects of murals.

Bangalow Sports Fields Sculpture

On 25 August 2011, Council resolved (11-685):

1. Support in principle the proposed ‘Sculpture by the Park’ for Bangalow sports grounds.

2. Support an allocation of up to $5,000 of Section 94 contributions for Bangalow to place 10 to 12 concrete plinths (1.5m x 1.5m x .01m) around the perimeter of the grounds adjacent to the walking track and a project management fee for the proponent; and

3. Meet with Mr Dev Lengjel and members of the Bangalow community to discuss details of the proposal including possible locations of new sports field lighting as per Bangalow Section 94 contributions Public Meeting (27 June 2011) and volunteer community input into constructing the plinths.

And (11-686) resolved that Council convene a Public Art Implementation PRG to coordinate and enact ongoing procedures of the Bangalow Sculpture in the Park as per Public Art Policy 10/011.

There are no records in Council’s data management system to indicate that the PRG described above was ever convened.

Several sculptures were installed around the Bangalow Sports Fields with at least 8 concrete plinths installed to house the artworks. The original proposal was that the sculptures would be ‘on loan’ to Council by artists ‘for the duration they are shown. The sculptures would be replaced after a few months and new sculptures by local artists would replace them to show off their work and be rotated with new sculptures twice a year…. to ensure ongoing stimulation and interest in the project.’ (copied from the original Notice of Motion).

In practice, the sculptures have never been replaced, some have been moved to Federal Park and several have been decommissioned due to their poor condition or in some cases, complaints from the community.

There are four remaining sculptures and as suggested in the Public Art Strategy, it is recommended that these be de-commissioned and removed, or relocated to a more suitable location.

Attempts have been made to contact community members that are known to be involved with the Bangalow Sculpture Park, however they have been unsuccessful.

Below are photos of the remaining sculptures and a map showing their current locations.

1255-ART

P409 –ART-001

P409-ART-552

P49-ART-584

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1

Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Public Art Policy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Strategy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria – last reviewed in October 2014.

Financial Considerations

To decommission or relocate the four Bangalow Sports Fields artworks a small amount from the public art budget will be required. It is proposed that up to $5,000 be allocated for this task if the Panel chooses to recommend decommissioning or relocation.

The current balance in the Public Art Budget for 2018/19 is $38,850.

There is currently no budget for maintenance of public artworks across the Shire.

Consultation and Engagement

Attempts have been made to contact community members that are known to be involved with the Bangalow Sculpture Park, however they have been unsuccessful.

Report No. 4.5 Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk - outstanding matters

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2019/475

Summary:

The Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk event has been held twice, in 2015 and in 2018. Council has provided financial and in kind support to both events.

Three matters are outstanding that require Public Art Panel consideration and a recommendation to Council:

1. ‘Pandanus Seed People’ Acquisition Prize from the 2018 event requires permanent approval;

2. ‘The Beast Within’ previously had temporary approval up to 12 months following the 2015 event but is still in situ

3. ‘The Labyrinth’ is still in its temporary form but requests have been made for the artists to implement the permanent treatments as previously approved by Council.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Public Art Panel recommends to Council

1. That the sculpture ‘The Beast Within’ by Allen Horstmanhof, that was temporarily approved to remain in situ following the 2015 Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk event, be approved to remain as a permanent sculpture.

2. That the sculpture ‘Pandanus Seed People’ by Antone Bruinsma, which won the Acquisition Prize at the 2018 Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk event, be approved to remain as a permanent sculpture.

3. That if ‘The Labyrinth’ is not installed as per the previous approval provided by Council by the end of June 2019, the temporary labyrinth is removed.

Attachments:

1 Antone Bruinsma - Pandanus Seed People, E2019/26962 , page 27 ⇩

2 Public Art Asset Application for permanent placement of Allen Horstmanhof The Beast Within, E2019/27381 , page 36⇩

REPORT

Three matters are outstanding that require Public Art Panel consideration and a recommendation to Council:

1. The Acquisition Prize from the 2018 event – ‘Pandanus Seed People’. Information about this sculpture is outlined below and in Attachment 1. The request is for a recommendation for Council to approve it as a permanent sculpture in Brunswick Heads.

2. ‘The Beast Within’, by Alan Horstmanhoff, had approval to be in place for up to 12 months following the 2015 event, however the sculpture is still in situ. A request has been received to leave the sculpture in place permanently.

3. ‘The Labyrinth’ remains in situ in its temporary form which poses risks and makes mowing and maintenance around the site difficult.

Pandanus Seed People

‘Pandanus Seed People’ won the Acquisition Prize at the 2018 Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk. This prize was funded from the donation made by Byron Shire Council and some members of the Public Art Panel were on the judging panel.

Attachment 1 contains the information required for Council to acquire the sculpture and add it to our Asset Management Register. Formal approval is required by Council resolution to acquire the sculpture and the Public Art Panel is requested to make a recommendation to Council.

The Beast Within

On 5 November 2015 the Public Art Assessment Panel recommended to Council that ‘The Beast Within’ remain in place temporarily (12 months to October 2016) (Resolution 15-604). The sculpture is still in situ.

The Public Art Panel may recall that another of Allen Horstmanshof’s artworks was approved by Council to remain in place permanently following the 2018 event, entitled ‘The Artefact of Things’.

The Public Art Panel is requested to make a recommendation to Council to allow the sculpture to remain in place permanently. Attachment 2 provides the information about this sculpture.

The Labyrinth

‘The Labyrinth’ was installed for the 2018 event in a temporary form. It was approved by Council following a Public Art Panel recommendation in August 2018 as a permanent sculpture using more suitable materials. However it remains in situ in its temporary form. Council staff have requested that the permanent treatment be implemented or the temporary sculpture be removed due to it posing risks in its current state.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1

Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Public Art Policy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Strategy – adopted August 2018.

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria – last reviewed in October 2014.

Financial Considerations

If the sculptures are approved to be added to Council’s Public Art Register this will impact the public art maintenance budget which is to be created.

Consultation and Engagement

Brunswick Nature Sculpture Walk organisers

bsc_logo_cmyk_solid_colour Public Art Asset Application pro forma

Please refer to Sections 6 and 7 of the Public Art Guidelines and Criteria.

Title of Artwork:

The Beast Within

Name of Artist:

Allen Horstmanhof

Type of Artwork Proposed:

SCULPTURE

Artwork Materials and Construction Details:

Sandstone on timber plynth

Date of creation (date of artwork)

2005

Dimensions

76 cm high by 62 cm wide by 62 cm deep

Proposed Location of Artwork:

Venture Park , Brunswick Heads

Proposed Signage for Artwork:

‘The Beast Within’ by Allen Horstmanhof

Do you have public liability insurance?

YES

Procurement Method (check box as applicable):

Commission

Direct purchase

X Donation

Loan – proposed period of ______________

Date of Procurement:

6^TH October 2015

Estimated Life of Artwork:

50 YEARS

Value of Artwork (estimate if unknown):

$7000

Attach copies of the following (check box as applicable):

X Artist’s CV (including examples of previous relevant work)

X Artistic statement

X Photos/design drawings/ specifications providing visual samples of proposed work (photo’s should be attached as jpegs no less than 300dpi)

X Risk Assessment (template available)

X Maintenance manual (template available)

This form, with attachments, should be sent to the Public Art Asset Officer.

Your application will be considered at the next available PAAP meeting.

Artists Name - Allan Horstmanhoff

Title of work- The Beast Within

Materials- sandstone

Dimensions – it is 76 cm high by 62 cm wide by 62 cm deep without the timber base which i would construct on site

Artist Statement –

A central theme in Joseph Conrad's book "The Heart of darkness", which was the basis for Francis Ford Coppola's film "Apocalypse Now", relates to the very thin veneer of civilisation that covers the beast within all of us.

This sculpture deals with this concept of that "Beast within". The form chosen is abstracted from the human and was designed to reflect the notion of suppressed energy. This beast, is not either good, or bad, but certainly only human in the broadest sense. It is waiting for events to occur that would set it off. . The almost electric lines of the rust-red ironstone striations reflects an explosive potential energy just waiting to be released. The "Beast" is not beaten into submission by our attempts at civilised behaviour. It is resting, perhaps only for a moment...perhaps longer. The veneer of civilisation on all of us is very thin indeed and the beast is always there...waiting.

Price - $7000

Photo of work

Public Art Risk Assessment

Please refer to Section 11 of the Public Art Guidelines and Criteria to ensure all aspects of risk assessment are considered.

Risk Assessment and Hazard Control Summary of Public Art

Risk Category & Hazard	Risk Rating	Possible Cause	Control Measure	Residual Risk Rating
OH&S
Slippery or loose surfaces/sharp edges on artwork.	Insignificant
Potential for injury or illness to public.	Insignificant
Manual handling required during installation.	Minor	Lifting to install	Using machinery to take weight of sculpture on installation	Insignificant
Traffic Hazards.	Insignificant
Engineer report required?	No
Concrete pads or barriers required?	No
Public Liability
Stable foundation.	Yes
Need for lighting/illumination.	No
Need for enclosure.	No
Is infrastructure sound?	Yes
Ongoing safety checks required to ensure stability?	No

Environmental hazard check including earthquake, winds and flood required?	No
Environment
Impact on environment/earth collapse or erosion.	Insignifcant
Potential impact on flora and fauna, air, soil, waterways or drains, noise.	Insignifcant
Financial
Financial impacts – immediate and ongoing.	Insignificant
Governance, Contractual & Legal

Political, Reputation & Image

Other

Risk Rating Matrix

			Insignificant	Minor	Moderate	Major	Catastrophic
		Governance, Contractual and Legal	Isolated non-compliance or breach; minimal failure of internal controls managed by normal operations; negligible financial impact.	Contained non-compliance or breach with short term significance, some impact on normal operations and minor financial impact.	Serious breach involving statutory authority or investigation; significant failure of internal controls; prosecution possible with significant financial impact.	Major breach with fines and litigation; critical failure of internal controls; long term significance and major financial impact.	Extensive fines and litigation with possible class action; threat to viability of organisation, program or service.
		Public Liability or OH&S	Injuries or ailments not requiring medical treatment; minimal loss to organisation.	Minor injury or First Aid Treatment Case; medium loss to organisation.	Serious injury causing hospitalisation or multiple medical treatment cases; high loss to organisation.	Life threatening injury or multiple serious injuries causing hospitalisation; very high loss to organisation.	Death or multiple life threatening injuries; worst case loss to organisation.
		OH&S	Injuries or ailments not requiring medical treatment	Minor injury or First Aid Treatment Case	Serious injury causing hospitalisation or multiple medical treatment cases	Life threatening injury or multiple serious injuries causing hospitalisation	Death or multiple life threatening injuries
		Environment	Minimal environmental impact; isolated release only	Minor environmental impact; on-site release immediately controlled.	Significant environmental impact; on-site release contained with assistance.	Major environmental impact; release spreading off-site; contained with external assistance.	Fatalities occur; extensive release off-site; requires long term remediation.
		Financial	1% of Budget or <$5K	2.5% of Budget or <$50K	> 5% of Budget or <$500K	> 10% of Budget or <$5M	>25% of Budget or >$5M
		Political, Reputation & Image	Isolated, internal or minimal adverse attention or complaint. No impact on funding or political support.	Heightened local community concern or criticism. Possible minor impact on funding and political support at local level.	Significant public criticism with or without media attention. Significant impact on funding and/or political support at local level.	Serious public or media outcry, broad media attention. Major impact on funding and/or political support at local and state level.	Extensive public outcry; potential national media attention. Complete removal of funding source and/or political support.
		Matrix	1	2	3	4	5
Almost Certain	Is expected to occur in most circumstances	5	Medium	High	High	Extreme	Extreme
Likely	Will probably occur	4	Medium	Medium	High	High	Extreme
Possible	Might occur at some time in the future	3	Low	Medium	Medium	High	Extreme
Unlikely	Could occur but doubtful	2	Low	Medium	Medium	High	High *
Rare	May occur in exceptional circumstances	1	Low	Low	Medium	Medium	High *

Report No. 4.6 Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk - public art proposals

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2019/568

Summary:

At a recent Public Art Panel meeting, the donation of further sculptures was suggested for the Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, being those left in situ following the first Mullumbimby Sculpture Festival held in November 2018.

This report provides the details of those sculptures and the Public Art Panel is requested to assess the proposal and make recommendations to Council.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Public Art Panel recommends to Council:

1. That the sculpture ‘Germination’ ______________________________________

2. That the requested financial contribution to the sculpture ‘UN RiNG’ __________________________________________________________________

Attachments:

1 Public Art Panel Application Germination - for Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, E2019/27101 , page 44 ⇩

2 Germination sculpture details for Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, E2019/27102 , page 50 ⇩

3 Public Art Panel Application - Un Ring for Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, E2019/27194 , page 51⇩

4 Public ARt Proposal for Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk - Unring - Sheet - sk201 - DETAIL DRAWING, E2019/27191 , page 58⇩

REPORT

During the presentation to the Public Art Panel at the 29 November 2018 meeting regarding a new sculpture acquisition for Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, a suggestion was made that sculptures left in situ following the first Mullumbimby Sculpture Festival be donated to the Sculpture Walk.

This report provides the details of those sculptures and the Public Art Panel is requested to assess the proposal and make a recommendation to Council.

Germination

Germination is the public art piece awarded the acquisition prize during the Ingenuity Sculpture Festival 2018. Attachments 1 and 2 provide the details of the public art proposal.

Creative Mullumbimby has stated it will take full responsibility for the installation in consultation with the residents of Brunswick Terrace and will work with Council Open Spaces staff throughout the process.

Un RiNG Sculpture

The details of this public art piece are found in Attachment 3 & 4, including an installation plan.

Creative Mullumbimby is seeking funding to acquire this work for the Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk. The cost to acquire the sculpture is $6000. Creative Mullumbimby proposes that Council provides $3000 towards the acquisition of the sculpture and Creative Mullumbimby would provide the other half, plus $500 for the installation of the sculpture.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1

Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Public Art Policy

Public Art Strategy

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria

MOU between Council and Creative Mullumbimby

Financial Considerations

If the Public Art Panel decides not to make a financial contribution to the acquisition of sculptures for the Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, the budget implications will be nil, except to the Public Art maintenance budget.

If the Public Art Panel wishes to recommend that Council contributes to the acquisition of sculptures for the Mullumbimby Sculpture Walk, then the budget implications will be the amount recommended by the Panel.

The current balance in the Public Art budget for 2018/19 is $38,850.

Consultation and Engagement

Creative Mullumbimby

Report No. 4.7 Public Art Proposal - Wall near McGettigans Lane, Byron Bay

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2019/584

Summary:

Council has received a proposal for artistic treatment of the wall near McGettigans Lane, designed to improve a highly visible site that is frequently covered in graffiti. The proposal has been put forward by a not-for-profit group and requires minimal financial contribution from Council.

The report outlines the proposal and suggests next steps that the Public Art Panel may like to consider in reaching a decision on a recommendation to Council.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Public Art Panel considers the proposal for the Wall near McGettigans Lane, Byron Bay and makes a recommendation to Council.

Attachments:

1 Public Art Asset Application - Wall near McGettigans Lane Byron Bay, E2019/27397 , page 62 ⇩

REPORT

There has been much community interest in the wall near McGettigans Lane (Ewingsdale Rd) Byron Bay which is highly visible as one drives towards Byron Bay and frequently covered in unsightly graffiti. A range of artists has shown interest in providing artistic treatment to the site.

The Public Art Panel considered a mural proposal from Creative Road at its 15 February 2018 meeting and supported the proposal in principle, but recommended that Council should not contribute funds to the project. The project did not raise enough funds to go ahead and Creative Road withdrew the proposal.

A new proposal has been received for the wall (details attached) from a group called ‘Artists of the Earth’ who propose to facilitate the project. They are a not-for-profit group and have raised funds to pay for the art work with the artist undertaking the piece for free. The artist has a significant portfolio of similar high-profile work (examples included in the proposal).

Although the artist has submitted two proposed designs, the applicant has suggested that the proposals can be modified if necessary.

The proposal indicates that Council would be required to prime the wall to create a blank canvas and potentially to seal the work once complete with a clear anti-graffiti coating although responsibility for this latter requirement is not entirely clear in the proposal.

Considerations

Given the public reaction to the Bayshore Drive Roundabout sculpture there are a number of factors the Panel should take into account in reaching any recommendation to Council, primarily:

· The need for and value in, public consultation about the proposal

· Whether there should be a public EOI for the design

Consultation

Council’s Works department has previously highlighted that Council is investing considerable resources in regular graffiti removal at this location.

Artists of the Earth has consulted with Ewingsdale Progress Association who support the project. If the proposal is approved, they are interested in starting the artwork in a matter of months.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1