Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Art topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council pushes back on $356,000 mural‑lighting plan, asks staff to consult art‑lighting experts and rail owners
Summary
Public Works presented five options to light murals at the Mixmaster Underpass with costs ranging from about $218,000 (solar) to $356,000 (hardwired steel poles with CCTV). Council members questioned glare, shadows and the visual impact of poles, and asked staff to consult arts‑district contractors and BNSF before returning with a revised plan.
The City of Commerce council weighed options on April 28 to illuminate nine murals at the Mixmaster Underpass and one mural in the City Hall parking lot, pressing staff to seek art‑lighting expertise and permissions from rail/bridge owners before selecting a design.
Public Works Director Shahid Abbas presented five concept options: an integrated steel pole with CCTV (presented as the cleanest option but the most expensive at about $356,000 with CCTV), a concrete pole alternative, railing‑mounted fixtures, a solar lighting option (about $218,000), and ground uplights (cheapest but prone to vandalism and safety hazards). Abbas said structural engineers discouraged drilling into the retaining wall and that a key constraint was the unknown "as‑built" drawings and the retaining wall's structural sensitivity.
Council members reacted to the renderings with two recurring concerns: whether poles or fixtures would obstruct the murals or cast visitors in shadow, and whether the city had explored simpler, lower‑cost clamps or conduit methods used in other art districts. "I see that little ledge ... you don't have to screw anything into it, but you can clamp something on it," one councilmember said. Several members urged staff to reach out to BNSF and to artists and lighting firms experienced in arts districts such as Wynwood and Fort Lauderdale to identify less invasive, more cost‑effective installations.
Abbas said the design team included lighting and structural engineers and that attaching foundations to the retaining wall was discouraged; he noted that some attachment methods to the existing bridge rails were considered but that certain railing attachments increased costs due to conduit and safety requirements. In response to council direction, staff agreed to pursue rail owner consultations, investigate art‑district vendors, and return with alternatives and permissions; the council continued the item for further outreach and analysis.
Council members emphasized urgency for lighting to be installed before high‑traffic holiday periods (the mayor mentioned Black Friday as an example) but said they would not approve a solution that obscures the artwork or compromises public safety. The council did not select a lighting option at the meeting.
