07 ATTACHMENT - Laserfiche WebLink

• Secondary users and/or community groups impacted by the project. The value and integrity of the panel selection process is dependent upon its ability to have access to authoritative knowledge about the public art field. This task can never be completely fulfilled by staff, nor should it be expected. The value of the panel system is the nature of discussion that happens within the panel; panel members should include those experienced and respected in the public art field as well as relevant stakeholders in the project. Professionals in the field of public art and artists should be selected for their expertise and their ability to positively contribute to the selection process. Residency is not an appropriate or relevant criterion for panel members fulfilling the arts professional or artist positions. Fortunately, Pleasanton is situated in a region rich in such expertise. The vast majority of panel members fulfilling the other positions will either be Pleasanton residents or will be working on Pleasanton projects; they will all be highly informed about local issues and values. The Civic Arts Manager will develop a pool of potential panelists to fill the arts professional and artist positions and forward it to the Civic Arts Commission for approval. The Manager will also recommend the method of selection for the project, including either an open competition or an invitational competition. Competitions should be based on gt-alitications and past work. The criteria listed below should be used to evaluate contenders and proposals. Finalists can be interviewed based on their ideas and past work or finalists can be interviewed and asked to submit a project proposal, for which they will be paid a fair fee based on prevailing and competitive amounts. Criteria for Selecting Artists • Quality and merit of art • Artist's' experience, training, and professional recognition • Artist's ability to successfully complete the project within the proposed budget • Artist's ability to respond to the project's contextual issues, community, audiences and users. • Artist's availability to work within the established timeline. • Place of work or residence, if geographic restrictions are outlined in the RFP or RFQ. • Additional criteria if agreed by Selection Panel consensus Criteria for Reviewing Artwork Proposals (concepts, schematics, design development) • Creativity and originality of the artist's response to the program • Artist's response to the physical context of the site, including such indicators as choice of scale, materials, form and content • Proposed relationship of the artwork to existing or anticipated environmental conditions, including architecture, landscaping, urban design and development, traffic and circulation • Artists' response to the social context of the site, which may include: local demographics, history, intended function of the artwork, views and public access • Relationship of the proposed artwork to other works in the City's collection and its ability to become a noteworthy addition • Analysis of the artist's proposed method of fabrication and installation of the artwork and an evaluation of safety and structural factors involved • Evaluation of the artist's proposed budget and schedule for completion • Evaluation of the proposed materials and their appropriateness to the project, including issues of structural and surface integrity, protection against theft and vandalism, public safety and weathering, and long term maintenance requirements • Feasibility within the limitations of the overall development schedule if the artwork is part of a larger construction project • Mass-produced artwork, artwork from catalogue ordering outlets and artwork that is not of museum quality will not be purchased or commissioned. 37