Upon discovery of an overlooked exclusion discouraging permanent art installations in Main Beach Park, the City Council Tuesday reversed last month’s approval for the installation of a sculpture within its prized “window to the sea.”
Staff will work with the Arts Commission to find an alternate location for “Sea Breeze” by artist Sukhdev Dail.
Before the Council’s unanimous approval of the sculpture on Feb. 24, Mayor Pro Tem Steve Dicterow asked about Main Beach policy restrictions. Since then, staff found a statement in the open space and conservation element of the General Plan, which guides city policy. It reads: “Encourage the placement of art forms in public places, other than the installation of permanent art forms at Main Beach Park.”
“If I had known about this, I would not have voted for it,” said Council member Rob Zur Schmiede.
“Sea Breeze” was meant to satisfy the Art in Public Places requirement for construction of the city lifeguard headquarters, part of which was fulfilled by the installation of Terry Thornsley’s mural outside the building at the north end of Main Beach.
In light of the previously unconsidered directive, Cultural Arts Manager Siân Poeschl brought the matter back to the Council. Even so, a determination of consistency with the General Plan “does not require exact, precise conformity to each and every applicable goal or policy,” she noted in the staff report. She also pointed out that, despite the policy, there are currently three other public art installations in Main Beach Park.
Furthermore, the Downtown Specific Plan, which includes Main Beach Park, encourages the inclusion of art features and sculpture where possible. The Arts Commission determined that Dail’s lithe nine-foot, eight-inch sculpture would not hinder, but rather “enhance the public’s viewing experiences,” Poeschl pointed out.
And Arts Commission members lined up Tuesday to speak in support of this finding, while others supported preserving the late Harry Lawrence’s vision of a “window to the sea,” which cleared commercial buildings and homes built along the sand boardwalk in the ‘60s, that they believe the General Plan meant to protect.
“We took a lot of care to make sure this is nothing that would block the window to the sea, because we all love it,” said Arts Commission member Mary Ferguson.
“We are an arts colony,” said Arts Commission member Suzanne Miller, adding that the proposed sculpture is not trite, but would be a uniquely original welcoming sign. “I think it will become the logo for the City of Laguna Beach,” she said.
With all the talk about preserving Laguna’s heritage, “our view is the most historic thing we have,” said resident Dale Ghere. “We can look at art in a lot of places, so we don’t need to put it in front of our bay window,” he said, suggesting that the lifeguard tower is the focal point and we shouldn’t “muck up the rest.”
“I don’t think sculpture would ‘muck up’ the beach,” countered Marija Miletic Dail. “This is a lady Laguna, something that would be treasured by tourists” who would enjoy the beach and the art on it.
“I am far larger than that skinny woman,” said Arts Commission member Pat Kollenda, making the point that the sculpture no more blocked the view than the people on the beach.
“I think it is significant that the people who want you to reconsider this all have white hair,” said Barbara Metzger. Lawrence “would have a fit” to see his vision obstructed, she said. “None of you have the right color hair to appreciate this, but I’m telling you what it’s meant to be.”
Council member Kelly Boyd recalled a time when a bowling alley, restaurants and coffee shops took the place of the open vista. “Now we do have it, but I don’t have a problem putting a nice piece of art in Main Beach,” he said. “I think it’s something that grows on you.” He said that if it did become a problem, it could be moved, but that he was willing to try it out.
At the final tally, Lawrence’s “window” and the General Plan carried the day.
Mayor Bob Whalen commended the Arts Commission for securing beautiful art, “but I don’t think it squares with the General Plan,” he said, voicing the majority opinion, with Boyd dissenting.
Is this the same “Window to the Sea” that was blocked by the ugly construction fencing for two year while the new lifeguard tower was being built? The same view that is now blighted but a proliferating population of aggressive homeless people. I think my wife would enjoy the art installation instead of being sexually harassed by homeless men when she runs in the morning. I believe the only thing “mucked up” is the inability of the city to clean up main beach. It is nasty now, sculpture or no sculpture.