WESTMINSTER PUBLIC ART ADVISORY PANEL
MINUTES OF MEETING
6 JULY 2009
17:30 WESTMINSTER CITY HALL
In Attendance / Presenting:Cllr Angela Hooper / Ivan Tenant
Philomena Davidson
John Pringle
Maurice Blik / Oku Ekpenyon Memorial 07
Cllr Gwyneth Hampson / Sandy Nairne Memorial 07
Philip Davies / Felicity Jones Memorial 07
Glynn Williams / Les Johnson Memorial 07
Emma King
Roger Bramble
Terry New
Brian Falconbridge
David Clegg
Toby Cuthbertson
1Apologies Received
Richard MacCormacJulia Peyton Jones
Vivien Lovell
2Minutes of meeting of February 2009
Brian Falconbridge requested that the outcome of the Panel’s query on the Palozzi Mosaics be included in the minutes.
The remainder of the minutes were agreed without change.
3.Planning Applications
3.1Slavery Memorial – Hyde Park
Sandy Nairne, a patron of Memorial 07, introduced the memorial 2007 project. He argued that this memorial will be of great significance. It will be the first memorial to the slave trade in a European capital city. The selected site is supported by both Royal Parks and DCMS. The educational aspect of the memorial is just as significant as its memorial significance.
For this reason, the figurative nature of the proposed memorial is important for the piece to fulfil its educational purpose.
Oku Ekpenyon responded to some of the panels other points from their meeting of February 2007.
1. She reiterated that the figurative and narrative elements of the piece were essential in the telling of the story of slavery, abolition and emancipation.
2. The panel would prefer a lower plinth. Memorial 07 would like to consider raising the plinth by a further 100mm in order to accommodate front on access to wheelchair users. There may well be a small scale reproduction of the memorial for the blind.
3. Splitting the narrative element from the sculptural element would weaken the piece.
Some panellists felt that the proposed memorial lacked a connection with its proposed location – that there was no slavery in the UK, and that while Britain undoubtedly benefited financially from the use of slaves in its colonies, the proposed memorial might make it appear that Britain had been a slave-owning nation. The panel were also concerned that the memorial did not celebrate Britain’s important role in abolition.
It was suggested that the City of London might be a more appropriate place to memorialise the wealth created for Britain on the back of slave use, and indeed it was pointed out that the City already has a slavery memorial.
The panel accepted that they were unlikely to have any influence on the figurative element of the memorial. They are more likely to be able to exert a positive influence on the landscape setting and the relief section, neither of which are finalised.
Philip Davies suggested that the applicants discuss the narrative panel with English Heritage – EH have a great deal of experience in producing interpretative materials for its sites around the country, and would be able to offer some very useful advice.
Panel may wish to comment on the landscape design brief.
The selected landscape architect may well have a positive impact on the plinth design.
The memorial should recognise the contribution of black Britons to abolition.
The memorial should explicitly address Britain’s role in the abolition of slavery – this is the only possible justification for siting the memorial in Hyde Park – rather than the City, Bristol, Liverpool, or a former colony.
3.2ORB Oases Public Art Strategy
Ivan Tenant from Plan Projects presented the work that he has been doing on the Oxford Regent and Bond Street Oases Public Art Strategy. He introduced concept of the oases – to create places to rest and linger in the west end, and summarised how public art can make a contribution this aim, and also to access and legibility.
There are two clusters of oases – those to the west of Regent Street and those to the east. The former are architecturally informed and are intended to enhance the retail experience of the area, while the latter are more youth and fashion oriented.
Some projects and themes were set out:
West End as London’s living room
Pools and channels
Multi functional items
Graffiti walls
Tennant connections
Auditory pieces
Temporary pieces
Character Grants to shopkeepers
Skyline / Rooftop projects
Lighting
Floorscapes
The next stage in the project is to prepare a plan for each oasis – on which work has already begun.
Panel asked about connections with local stakeholders, including cultural institutions, and residents.
Local organisations will be able to contribute to objectives in the plan, just as developers will. For example the Photographers Gallery is currently in a position to contribute to the plan. Consultation with stakeholders who have an interest in a single oasis will follow the publication of the draft – at this stage the only stakeholders being consulted are those with interests across the oases.
The Marylebone Association support proposals to improve legibility, but are wary of proposals that will further populate currently quiet areas.
Panel were interested to know whether an authorised graffiti wall would absorb graffiti writing from the local area, or whether graffiti would be likely to ‘spill over’ from the wall to previously unaffected areas. Ivan proposed a pilot scheme to establish whether this is the case.
Discussion.
Panel felt that the strategy was overly ambitious, and aimed to cover too much ground too quickly. They would rather see a plan showing engagement with stakeholders, the brief for the strategy, followed by a discussion of opportunities and constraints.
The panel felt that the urban design aspects of the strategy were stronger than the public art components. The document could be useful in identifying opportunities and constraints of each oasis, but to identify specific areas for public art is to pre-empt the legitimate role of the artist, who should be offered the broadest possible range of opportunities.
Panel would also have liked the opportunity to see and comment upon the brief for the strategy.
3.3‘Field Work’ Portman Mews South
Panel had considered at their last meeting a proposal for Old Quebec Street relating to a s106 agreement on a site at Portman Mews South. Panel, while they liked the piece, felt that it would be lost in its proposed location.
A revised proposal has therefore been submitted, which sees a conceptually similar piece by the same artist installed as part of the fabric of the Portman Mews building. Field Work consists of a vitrine set into the elevation of the building containing a series of sculptures or grasses, representing the agrarian landscape of Marylebone parish before the mid eighteenth century.
Panel were supportive of the approach, though found the effect of the piece in context hard to visualise from the visuals provided. They wondered whether a symmetrical approach had been considered.
3.4Public Art Strategy Welbeck Street
Panel considered the public art strategy for the development at 1-2 Welbeck Street. The public art strategy forms a section of the design and access statement for the planning application at 1-2 Welbeck Street.
While the panel had no objection to the four specific areas of opportunity identified in the strategy, they felt that the strategy lacked ambition. The size of the development is considerable, and the four locations identified for artist intervention was considered very modest.
It was felt that the selected artist should be able to identify what portion of the building to work with, and that the scale of the commission should be commensurate with the scale of the building. Panel wished to remind the applicant of the rule of thumb that the public art contribution should be 1% of the cost of development.
The panel would be happy to comment on a detailed strategy in due course, including artist shortlist, and further information on the workshops.
3.5Gates, Salem Road
Panel were presented with a proposal for two sets of artist designed gates for a part redevelopment on Salem Road, W2.
Panel were content with the two shortlisted artists – it was felt that either of them should be able to carry out a competent commission.
While the proposed gates do not offer a great deal of visibility, panel accepted that in this case other opportunities were limited.
It was suggested that the applicants have a look at the new balconies to the front and rear of 2-4 Bentinck Street which are very effective.
The Panel look forward to seeing a detailed design in due course.
3.6‘Necklace’ Murray House, Vandon Street
Panel were presented with a proposal from artist Annie Catrell to address the ground floor of a new block of housing association flats with a ‘necklace’ of coloured glass beads set into the elevation, and an etched ‘lace’ panel to the glass of the main entrance.
The panel admired the unusual concept, and felt that it would enliven an otherwise unremarkable facade.
The panel felt that two technical points would be key to the success of the commission – first that the method of fixing be secure, and vandal proof to prevent the beads from being prized out.
Second, the effective colouration of the beads will be key to the success of the piece. Panel felt that there is a risk that the intensity of colour of the beads would be lost when they are set into the stone. The applicants should ensure that the final piece is not compromised by the lack of refracted light.
3.770 Wigmore Street
This proposal, for the incorporation of a text piece into the fins proposed for the Jason Court elevation of this redevelopment. The selected artist is Mathew Lee Knowles, a composer and text artist. Knowles proposal is to apply overheard snatched of conversation, much filtered and deconstructed, as text to the vertical fins.
Panel applauded the good use of this difficult location – and supported the selection of the artist. They look forward to seeing the final proposal.
3.8Park Lane Mews Hotel
Two locations are proposed for public art in this Mayfair redevelopment. The first is a pedestrian passage through to Shepherd Market, of which the walls, floor surface or soffit could be addressed. The second is a panel on the building facade, adjacent to the entrance to the passage.
Panel were content with the proposed locations, and would prefer to see both addressed. They noted that Prue O’Day is a very good consultant. Panel look forward to seeing proposals as the scheme progresses.
3.9Horse at Water
A sculpture by Nic Fiddian Green, Horse at Water, has been installed at Marble Arch on a temporary basis, to coincide with the re-opening of the arch. The owners of the piece are now applying for permission to retain the sculpture on site for a period of 6 months.
Panel supported the application. They felt that it is a good piece, suitably scaled for its location, and makes a good start to the program of temporary sculpture at Marble Arch.
3.11Mosaic – East Pavilion, Marble Arch
Panel considered an application for a mosaic within the east pavilion of Marble Arch. The mosaic, based on a Roman four seasons mosaic will depict 21st century activities.
Panel were content with the proposal in this instance, though considered that the application would be more apt coming from the landlord of the property, rather than the artist herself. This item raised a general point about artist’s own applications, which should be discouraged where possible, in favour of other institutions making the application.
3.12Mural, Harrow Road
This proposal for a mural on a blank gable end on the Harrow Road comes from the Harrow Road Neighbourhood Partnership. The HRNP, along with Walterton and Elgin Community Housing and the Westminster Drug Project, will be working with young people in the local community and a group of street artists, ATG to create a mural on the theme of Transformation.
While they considered that the proposal was very ambitious, the Panel did not have an in principal objection to this community led project. The Panel suggested that officers request more information about ATG; their capacity to supervise the work, and some examples of their past projects.
It was felt however that a project such as this will necessarily have a limited lifespan. This is because maintenance of the piece in good condition is likely to be hard to achieve, and because by its nature, the piece will cease to have local relevance.
Panel therefore suggested that consent, if given, incorporates an opportunity for a review of the piece in due course, or is for a fixed period only.
AOB
A proposal was received at a late stage from Royal Parks, who would like to site four Anish Kapoor Sculptures in Hyde Park and St James’s Park.
It is proposed that two sculptures be placed in the lake in St James’s Park; either two Sky Mirror sculptures or two Spire sculptures.
Hyde Park is proposed as the location for Pod. A fourth location for sculpture is still under discussion. The proposed period of installation is from September to January, to coincide with an Anish Kapoor exhibition at the Royal Academy.
The meeting ended at 8.30pm.
Date of next meetings:
28th September
23rd November