Since San Diego began requiring most construction projects to include public art 20 years ago, hundreds of sculptures, fountains, mosaics and other kinds of projects have been popping up all over the city. The goal of the program is to help make San Diego a world-class city, where tourists and residents not only experience great weather but also get inspired, challenged and entertained by provocative art pieces. While some critics complain the projects can cost as much as $1 million and others question the artistic value and location of some projects, city officials say the program has mostly been a remarkable success. “I think a key aspect of what makes people want to live in San Diego and visit San Diego is our public spaces and our public art,” said Christine Jones, who leads the program as the city’s chief of civic art strategies. Jones said public art programs, which many other cities around the globe have created, elevate a city’s image and reputation. “Public art combines creative expression with civic life,” said Jones, contending San Diego would be missing something crucial without it. “San Diego is the eighth largest city in the country and the second largest in California — it’s a vibrant metropolis.” But although the program has led to the creation of several hundred projects spanning nearly every city neighborhood, it might have been even more prolific if the rules had been written a bit differently. The city’s public art requirement established in 2004 — 2% of the price tag for public projects and 1% of the cost for private projects — exempted residential buildings and any part of a project built underground. That underground rule has dramatically shrunk the public art required for the multibillion-dollar Pure Water sewage recycling system, because much of the system is being built underground. And the residential rule means that no public art will be required for all the high-rise apartment buildings the city envisions in Hillcrest, University City and other neighborhoods that have been sharply upzoned in recent years. The art installation Horizon Dock in Cañon Street Pocket Park seen on Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2024 in San Diego. (Meg McLaughlin / The San Diego Union-Tribune) Keith Opstad, chair of the city’s public art committee, said his favorite aspect of the city’s public art program is when projects reflect the cultural heritage of the city and particular neighborhoods. He pointed to a new sculptural boat dock in Point Loma’s Cañon Street Pocket Park that aims to celebrate the nearby Portuguese community’s longtime connection to the sea and shipping culture. “People from the community openly wept when they saw it,” said Opstad, who teaches visual art at Westview High School near Rancho Peñasquitos. “And it will help tourists see a bit of our cultural vibe.” Another provocative piece is Pacific Soul, a 25-foot-tall stainless steel sculpture featuring ribbon-like characters from eight different alphabets that combine to create the shape of a human body. Part of the private development side of the city’s public art program, Pacific Soul was erected in 2018 on the site of the Pacific Gate tower at Broadway and Pacific Highway in downtown. Public art pieces are also prominent in the public parks, libraries and fire stations built across the city since 2004. The art installation Pacific Soul seen on Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2024 in San Diego. (Meg McLaughlin / The San Diego Union-Tribune) What’s required Prior to 2004, the city had a mostly disorganized and relatively haphazard public art program that began in 1984. That program had no requirements for private developers, and only a loose agreement that the city would contribute 1% of its annual budget for capital and infrastructure projects to public art. The city stopped contributing during a recession in the early 1990s and contributed less consistently for a few years after that, so the next decade saw only limited public art projects. Then in 2004, the City Council approved a new public art master plan and the new policy. Under the policy, the city must spend 2% of its annual budget for capital and infrastructure projects on public art. But the council can waive that during tough budget times and did so in 2010 during the Great Recession. The city is facing a deficit of more than $300 million this year, but cuts to public art haven’t been mentioned so far. For private projects, it’s more complicated. If a developer wants the art piece on the same property as the development, they must spend 1% of the project’s cost. If a developer is willing to have the money placed in a citywide public art fund that can pay for projects anywhere, they are only required to contribute half a percent. Over the last five years, developers on more than 60% of projects have chosen to pay the higher fee so they can have the art on-site, Jones said. An example is the recently completed IQHQ Research and Development District on the downtown waterfront, which will have 19 pieces of public art on its sprawling property. For such art funded by the city, officials sometimes get frustrated that state law requires it to be located on-site. Public art on display on the walls of the San Ysidro Public Library — an art piece called “Picadillo Folklorico” by artists Einar and Jamex de la Torre — on Thursday, Jan. 2, 2025, in San Diego. (Alejandro Tamayo / The San Diego Union-Tribune) That’s fine for libraries and parks, but it doesn’t make a lot of sense for industrial city projects like the Pure Water Recycling Plant under construction in western Miramar. City officials explored finding another location for the public art built with that project — a 50-foot-tall sculpture called Daphne. But because taxpayers funded it, state law says all the money must be spent on-site. “We explored the elasticity around that, how far it could go,” said Jonathan Glus, director of the city’s Cultural Affairs Department. “But because of state mandates, it really is tied to the actual construction site.” Glus and Jones said that while the site of Daphne gets no foot traffic except during tours of the new recycling plant, they are still optimistic it will make a splash because it’s located on the busy Eastgate Mall street near UTC. “It’s going to be front and center and publicly seen and accessible,” Jones said. While Daphne’s price tag is $1 million, San Diego would have been required to spend about $20 million on public art for the ongoing first phase of Pure Water if underground projects were part of the public art program. That’s because Phase 1 will cost more than $1.2 billion. Jones thinks the rationale for excluding projects built underground was that they aren’t urbanizing the landscape, so no public art is needed to counteract that. But she’s not exactly sure what the reasoning was back in 2004. It’s also not clear why residential projects were excluded from the private side of the public art program. How projects happen When the city calculates the required public art contribution of a project, not all expenses are included. Design, pre-design, construction costs and any contingency are included, but land acquisition and costs for underground work aren’t. The process for choosing artists and projects is also complex. The art installation TEXT/TILE at the Pacific Highlands Ranch Branch Library seen on Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2024, in San Diego. (Meg McLaughlin / The San Diego Union-Tribune) When a site is chosen, artists are asked to submit their qualifications in a national open competition — but they are not asked to submit a proposal for the project. Once an artist is chosen, they do research and engage the community at workshops and forums and then propose a project that they believe reflects the community’s past, future or ambitions. The public art committee and the community then provide feedback, which often prompts changes. Artist James Dinh, who is designing a public art project for the Willie Henderson Sports Complex in the Mountain View neighborhood of Southeastern San Diego, recently agreed to some changes based on public feedback. Runners in a race depicted in the sculpture were initially portrayed with naturalistic skin tones in shades of Black, brown and White. But Opstad said some critics objected to the implications of having runners of different races appearing ahead of and behind each other, so now their skin tones will be vibrant colors instead of actual skin tones. While opinions about art can vary widely from person to person, Opstad said the general rule is that a public art project should be captivating. “The goal is to engage the viewer for a prolonged period of time,” he said. That could mean addressing a controversial topic or just making a project with enormous intricacies. Opstad understands why critics scoff at the high costs of some public art projects, but he stressed that these projects are typically outdoors and must be built to last for decades. “It’s important for projects to stand the test of time,” he said. Glus said the city is getting a decent return on investment if the city’s public art convinces tourists to come back to San Diego — and to tell their friends how great the city is. He pointed out that downtown and the waterfront are particularly rich in public art. In addition to the city’s program, the Port of San Diego has a strong program of its own, and most federal buildings downtown include public art. Public art on display on the walls of the San Ysidro Public Library — “El Movimiento” by artists Einar and Jamex de la Torre. (Alejandro Tamayo / The San Diego Union-Tribune)