SR-11-10-2015-3A
City Council
Report
City Council Regular Meeting: November 10, 2015
Agenda Item: 3.A
1 of 7
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Martin Pastucha, Director, Public Works, Architecture Services
Subject: Appropriate Funds for Chain Reaction Restoration and Conservation
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Authorize the expenditure of up to $275,000 to complete the restoration
project and landscape barrier for Chain Reaction;
2. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget
Actions section of this report.
Executive Summary
The Chain Reaction sculpture, installed in 1991, is in need of substantial restoration and
maintenance. On March 20, 2012, Council approved the Arts Commission’s
recommendation to remove Chain Reaction, and agreed to delay such action until
November 15, 2012, to allow the family and members of the community time to
fundraise for the necessary repairs. In July and November 2012, the sculpture and an
associated parcel of land were designated as a City landmark by the Landmarks
Commission. On February 25, 2014, Council accepted funds in the amount of
$101,290 from community contributions to support the restoration of Chain Reaction,
authorized $75,000 to complete final testing and structural evaluation, and authorized
the development of a restoration plan for the sculpture. On August 10, 2015 the
restoration plan was presented to the Landmarks Commission and was approved for
Certificate of Appropriateness. Staff recommends that Council approve budget changes
in the Financial and Impacts section of this report to appropriate funds in the amount of
$275,000 for restoration and conservation of Chain Reaction and the design and
construction of the landscape barrier, and issue a Request for Bids to execute the
restoration plan.
Background
History of the sculpture
Chain Reaction, by Paul Conrad, was a gift to the City that was approved by Council on
October 9, 1990 after extensive public process and debate. The sculpture was funded
by a private donation of $250,000 to the Santa Monica Arts Foundation.
2 of 7
Initial Assessment and Findings
In the summer of 2011, the City’s Building Official observed members of the public,
including children, climbing and interacting with the sculpture and was prompted to
complete a preliminary evaluation of its safety. The City assembled a professional team
to assess the structural integrity of the sculpture. Overall the findings were mixed, with
some aspects that performed well, some identified areas of concern, and some
substantial unknowns, due in part to the inability to access certain areas of Chain
Reaction without causing substantial damage to the sculpture. The consulting team and
the City’s Building Official identified the need for further testing and developed
preliminary estimates of both the anticipated costs of such tests as well as the likely
cost of repair, which ranged from $227,372 to $423,172. Initial test results of the
sculpture showed inconclusive results for the fiberglass shell and some rust and
corrosion of the internal steel frame. The welded connections at the top of the piece
could not be tested or visually inspected without creating a larger opening. Further
testing of the fiberglass and of the steel frame, along with a more complete structural
analysis, were recommended.
Action by the Arts Commission
While the initial tests were being done, the Santa Monica Arts Commission held a
special meeting on February 1, 2012 to hear public testimony and consider the status of
Chain Reaction. They considered the findings to date along with the City’s deaccession
policy which outlines when a sculpture may be removed from public display. The Arts
Commission voted 10 to 1 in support of the staff recommendation to deaccession and
remove the sculpture. The Commission also voted to recommend that such action be
delayed by six months to allow the family and co mmunity supporters of Chain Reaction
a period of time to raise the funds necessary to repair the sculpture.
An update on the status of Chain Reaction was presented to the Arts Commission on
January 17, 2013. At that time staff proposed that the Commission recommend
allocating $85,000 from the Cultural Trust Fund to be used to jumpstart community
fundraising. The proposal was not approved by the Commission.
3 of 7
Action by City Council
On March 20, 2012 (attachment A), Council approved the Arts Commission’s
recommendation to remove the sculpture, and agreed to delay such action until
November 15, 2012, to allow the family and members of the community time to
fundraise for the necessary repairs. Council further instructed staff to complete the
additional testing of the sculpture that could be completed without major damage.
Council directed staff to return with recommendations regarding funding, restoration
and/or de-acquisition.
On January 22, 2013 (attachment B), Council revisited the status of Chain Reaction. At
that meeting Council approved an extension through February 2014 for the community’s
fundraising efforts and authorized the expenditure of up to $20,000 from the City’s
Cultural Affairs division operating budget to patch and repair the sculpture in the interim.
Staff recommended the authorization of a commitment of up to $80,000 to be used for a
landscape barrier around the sculpture to inhibit future climbing should the rebuilding of
the sculpture move forward. Council did not take action on securing funding for
landscaping.
On February 25, 2014 (attachment C), Council once again revisited the status of Chain
Reaction. At the meeting Council recognized the community’s fundraising efforts and
accepted funds in the amount of $101,290 to support the restoration of Chain Reaction,
and authorized the expenditure of $75,000 from the City’s General Fund to complete
additional testing as required by the City's Building Official to address remaining areas
of concern regarding the structural stability of the sculpture. Additionally, Council
authorized staff to proceed with development of a plan to restore the sculpture based on
the findings and conclusions of additional testing. This testing and assessment was
completed and the proposed restoration received a Certificate of Appropriateness from
the Landmarks Commission on August 10, 2015. The funds raised by the community
have been held by the Santa Monica Arts Foundation for the restoration of Chain
Reaction. With interest earned the total amount of funds available is now $106,000.
Prior to commencement of the work the funds will be transferred from the Santa Monica
4 of 7
Arts Foundation to the City.
Discussion
Impact of Landmark Status
Chain Reaction is now the City’s first landmarked sculpture of public art. The sculpture
is no longer part of the City’s public art collection as it has been deaccessioned by the
Arts Commission. On July 9, 2012 the Landmarks Commission designated Chain
Reaction a City landmark, and on November 12, 2012 they added an associated
landmark parcel to the designation. Pursuant to the Landmarks ordinance, any
alteration, restoration, construction, removal, relocation or demolition of the sculpture or
its associated landmark parcel will require issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness
by the Landmark Commission or City Council upon appeal. And any restoration work
performed on the sculpture will need to meet the Secretary of the Interior Standards for
the Treatment of Historic Properties.
Structural Testing
In late 2011 and in early 2012 the City had all of the testing performed that could be
completed without removal of the dome portion of the sculpture, which at the time was
considered necessary to gain visual access to key structural welds at the connection of
the dome to the support column. The City’s Building Official received the final report
from the structural engineer in late summer 2012 and issued a memo detailing his
findings on September 6, 2012. The Building Official recommended that in order to
ascertain and address any long-term safety concerns associated with the sculpture, the
dome would need to be removed, and testing would need to be completed on the
portion of the sculpture that could not previously be accessed. The City asked Twining,
Incorporated, the testing company, along with Melvyn Green the structural engineer
that performed the earlier work on the sculpture, for an estimate to complete this final
testing and structural evaluation, including removal of the dome. The art conservator,
Rosa Lowinger and Associates, would also be involved as needed to limit damage to
the sculpture to the extent possible. Council authorized an expenditure of $75,000 to
complete the final testing and structural evaluation. Final testing on Chain Reaction was
completed in May 2015. Melvyn Green and Associates provided the City a “Structural
5 of 7
Investigation and Repair Recommendations” report in July of 2015 (attachment D).
Restoration Plan
Based on the aggregate findings of completed testing and evaluation of Chain Reaction,
the conservator, Rosa Lowinger and Associates prepared a proposed Conservation
Treatment Plan for restoration of the sculpture (attachment E). The proposed
restoration plan includes, but is not limited to, repairing chains and fiberglass areas
removed during testing, repairing or replacing chain connectors, cleaning and recoating
chains, removing chains at the top of the sculpture and applying a UV resistant paint.
The plan meets all of the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior standards for
restoration. On August 10, 2015 the restoration plan was presented to the Landmarks
Commission and they approved the Certificate of Appropriateness for the planned
restoration. The restoration plan was vetted with the artist’s family and their
representation in a separate meeting per the Landmark Commission Statement of
Official Action. Staff recommends the City issue a Request for Bids for qualified teams
to execute the restoration plan. The estimated cost of the restoration plan is $125,000.
Work is anticipated to be completed in four months.
Landscape Plan
In July of 2015 the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to provide landscape
design services for two independent projects, Chain Reaction and Palisades Park. The
RFP documents required separate cost proposals for each project. Furthermore, the
design services for each of the two projects would be provided under different contracts.
The RFP was posted on the City’s on-line bidding site. A total 71 vendors downloaded
the RFP. Listed below are the five proposals that were received for Chain Reaction:
Proposal Cost
Blue Green Consulting $21,950
Campbell and Campbell $15,000
David Votz Design $16,746
Eco Tech Services $5,250
SWA Group $13,530
6 of 7
The proposals were evaluated based on the criteria in SMMC 2.24.073, including price,
experience and credentials, demonstrated competence to provide services, capacity to
perform contract and reputation. The proposal with the lowest cost did not demonstrate
the experience and understanding of the project as required by the RFP. SWA Group,
with the second lowest cost, is recommended as the most qualified firm to provide
landscape design services. The City intends to enter into an informal professional
services contract with SWA Group per SMMC 2.24.074 to initiate the design. After
approval of the design from Landmarks Commission and City Council, issue a Request
for Bids for the installation of a landscape barrier at the base of the Chain Reaction
sculpture. The landscape barrier will be composed of drought-tolerant plantings of
sufficient depth and density as to deter access to the sculpture. Additionally, members
of the community, including the artist’s son, have expressed interest in adding lighting to
the project scope. Lighting would be an additive alternate and would require an
additional $25,000 for design and construction.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
The total cost for restoration, the design and construction of the landscape barrier, and
the design and construction of lighting for Chain Reaction is $275,000. In order to move
forward with the proposed work, the following budget actions are required:
1. Establish revenue budget at account 01560.404840 in the amount of $106,000;
2. Release of fund balance from reserve account 1.380006 (capital contingency) of
$169,000; and
3. Appropriate $275,000 to account C014087.589000.
Prepared By: Danny Welch, Architectural Associate
Approved Forwarded to Council
7 of 7
Attachments:
A. March 20, 2012 Staff Report (weblink)
B. January 22, 2013 Staff Report (weblink)
C. February 25, 2014 Staff Report (weblink)
D. Conservation Treatment Plan
E. Structural Investigation and Repair Recommendations Report
Struc tural In ves ti ga tion and Re pair Rec om men da tions
of the
“Chain Re ac tion”
Santa Monica, California
Pre pared for
City of Santa Monica
Santa Monica, CA
Sub mit ted by
Melvyn Green and As so ci ates
Struc tural En gi neers
July, 2015
Melvyn Green and Associates, Inc. 3868 Car son Street, Suite 300, Torrance, CA 90503
Table of Contents
Intent and Scope .................................1
Observations ...................................2
Findings and Recommendations .........................3
Photographs ....................................4
Test Report on Fiberglass.............................9
Intent and Scope
The Chain Re ac tion Sculp ture in Santa Monica was stud ied in 2013, and again in 2014
and 2015, to de ter mine its struc tural con di tion. While no spe cific struc tural con cerns
were iden ti fied the find ings were un clear on the con di tion of the stain less steel con nec -
tions that form the “wagon wheel.” and the fi ber glass coat ing. At that time it was de cided
to per form ad di tional in ves ti ga tion and test ing to de velop a sense of any ma te rial
deterioration or other conditions.
Meth od ol ogy
The fol low ing ac tiv i ties were un der taken in the stud ies:
Struc tural Anal y sis – A re view of the orig i nal struc tural de sign was con ducted by Larry
Brugger, Struc tural En gi neer. A sec ond in de pend ent anal y sis was con ducted by the
undersigned.
The struc tural anal y ses fo cused on the sculp ture’s ba sic struc ture in clud ing the foun da -
tion and an chor age, the main sup port pole, in te rior fram ing, and the con nec tion be tween
elements.
Test ing Pro gram – The in ves ti ga tion of the “non-struc tural” el e ments in clud ing sev eral
in te rior ob ser va tions by Rosa Lowinger As so ci ates (RLA) and by Twin ing Lab o ra to ries
(2012).
The in ves ti ga tion by RLA in cluded a vi sual in spec tion of the wagon wheel stain less
steel, the fi ber glass, at tach ment ma te ri als for the chain, and the chain connections.
The Twin ing Lab o ra to ries test pro gram in cluded an in spec tion of the struc tural welds and
a se ries of tests of the fi ber glass coat ing of the sculpture.
Site Vis its – A num ber of site in spec tions were un der taken in di vid u ally and as a team.
Sup port was pro vided by the City of Santa Monica with a boom truck and operator.
Observations
Steel Struc ture – No de te ri o ra tion of the struc tural steel form ing the sculp ture was ob -
served on any of the site vis its. Tests in cluded vi sual in spec tions along with ra di og ra phy
in ves ti ga tion un der Twin ing’s di rec tion. In an at tempted to ver ify the an chor bolts, some
con crete was re moved but the end of the bolt was not found after 20 inches of depth.
Stain less Steel Con nec tions – The stain less wagon wheel is welded to a mild steel frame.
The welds were vi su ally ob served and no de te ri o ra tion was found.
Fi ber glass – Sam ples were taken of the fi ber glass skin in 2012 and again in 2015. The
test re sults showed that the flex ural tests con ducted in 2015 were com pa ra ble to those
taken in 2012. The val ues var ied by the lo ca tion of the sam ple with spec i mens with a
tight ra dius cur va ture show ing lower values.
Ten sile strength was lower for spec i mens taken from the top also showed lower val ues.
This might be the re sult of de te ri o ra tion due to ul tra vi o let ra di a tion. Again at the un der -
side the ten sile strength was sur pris ingly low. Again it may be a re sult of the tight cur va -
ture in that area.
The fi ber glass has two fac tors that might cause de te ri o ra tion. The first is ul tra vi o let ra di -
a tion from the sun. It is known that sun light will cause de te ri o ra tion. To limit this, ex te -
rior fi ber glass is gen er ally coated with paint or other coat ing. This was done to Chain
Reaction.
The sec ond pos si ble de te ri o ra tion fac tor is the shape of the fi ber glass. On the gently
curved sur faces the stress caused by bend ing and loads is mod er ate. On the sharper, or
tighter, curved sur faces, there is more ten sile stress due to cur va ture. This might re sult in
long term stress or creep in the fiberglass.
The gen eral find ings of the tests were in con clu sive in that there was a wide vari a tion in
stress be tween sam ples taken from the same area (top, side, and bot tom). And the great est
strength loss seems to have oc curred on the bot tom where there are curves with very
small radii.
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica 2
Findings and Recommendations
The fol low ing eval u a tion and rec om men da tions would ex tend the life of the struc ture
sig nif i cantly.
Steel Struc ture – The gen eral con di tion is ac cept able. The struc tural anal y sis il lus trated
com pli ance with the build ing code cri te ria of the time. No ma jor rust or loss of ma te rial
was ob served.
Rec om men da tion – No ad di tional test ing or in ves ti ga tion is rec om mended.
Stain less Steel – The ob serv able con nec tions ap peared in tact with no vis i ble fail ures. No
vis i ble de te ri o ra tion of the stain less steel was ob served.
Rec om men da tion – No ad di tional test ing or in ves ti ga tion is rec om mended.
Fi ber glass – No clear an swer re gard ing the con di tion of the fi ber glass was iden ti fied.
How ever the fi ber glass on the top showed less flex ural and less ten sile strength.
Rec om men da tion – For the near term pres er va tion of the sculp ture, it is rec om mended
that ex posed ar eas of the top, and sides if ap pli ca ble, be recoated by the con ser va tor. This
may be ac com plished by mov ing the chains as pos si ble, ap ply ing a coat ing, and mov ing
the chains back. As part of this all open ings in the fi ber glass that were cut for in spec tion
should be repaired.
Chains and Con nec tions – Where the at tach ment of the chains mix dif fer ent met als
such as cop per and iron/steel, the con nec tion should be eval u ated, the con nec tion then
im proved with in stal la tion of a new, com pat i ble, con nec tor. This may in volve screws,
wires, and other con nec tors.
Rec om men da tion – Cor rect po ten tial is sues with dif fer en tial ma te ri als as pos si ble. With
the com plex ity of the struc ture this may not be 100 per cent pos si ble. The chains should
be in spected to ver ify that they are con nected to gether and that there are no loose pieces
that could fall.
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica 3
Photographs
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica
7/7/2015 4
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica
7/7/2015 5
Photo 2 - In te rior photo from 2013 show ing the con di tion of the struc tural steel and the stain less
steel welds. No de te ri o ra tion noted.
Photo 1 - Scanned im age dur ing the orig i nal con struc tion show ing the stain less steel of the wagon
wheel or mush room.
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica
7/7/2015 6
Photo 4 - In te rior photo in 2015 shows the steel and welds in good con di tion.
Photo 3 - In te rior photo from 2013 show ing welds from stain less to struc tural steel. Formed lath in
back ground has fi ber glass on the ex te rior side.
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica
7/7/2015 7
Photo 6 - Fi ber glass sam ples taken in 2015. The sam ples show the tight ra dius bends needed to ob -
tain the de sired shape. These tightly curved sam ples showed less strength than the long ra dius
samples
Photo 5 - An other photo taken in 2015 shows weld and steel near the base of the mush room in good
con di tion.
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica
7/7/2015 8
Photo 8 - Struc tural and stain less steel and welds are shown in this 2012 Twin ing Labs photo.
Photo 7 - In te rior in ves ti ga tion photo by Twin ing Labs. staff. (2012)
Test Report on Fiberglass
Chain Reaction, Santa Monica
7/7/2015 9
Chain Reaction by Paul Conrad
Proposed conservation treatment to address chains and fiberglass including repatination
of chains
Prepared for:
Danny Welch
City of Santa Monica, Architecture Services Division
1437 4th St., Suite 300|Santa Monica, CA 90401|(310) 458-2205
Santa Monica, CA
Prepared by:
Rosa Lowinger, Principal and Chief Conservator
Rosa Lowinger & Associates
Conservation of Art + Architecture
Los Angeles / Miami
September 15, 2015
Chain Reaction by Paul Conrad
Rosa Lowinger & Associates • September, 2015
2
GENERAL:
The sculpture titled Chain Reaction, by the late artist Paul Conrad is situated on a grassy lawn
near the corner of Main Street and Pico Boulevards. The sculpture stands ca. 26‘ high and is
fabricated of a structural steel core to which is attached a form that has the appearance of resin
and fiberglass composition. The surface appears painted or colored as well. The finish of the
sculpture consists of hollow copper tube chains that are affixed to the fiberglass resin surface with
steel screws of varying composition. In 2011, concerns about the structural stability of the
sculpture initiated a study by the City of Santa Monica Department of Building Safety. Since then
the author of this report has examined the artwork numerous times in conjunction with
independent engineer Mel Green and Ron Takiguchi of the City of Santa Monica. Most recently
the sculpture was subjected to sampling and testing of the fiberglass to determine its structural
stability. This proposal addresses the following issues:
1. Examination of all copper chain connectors and replacement of corroded connectors,
wires, and nails that are protruding unsafely from the surface, repair of areas of fiberglass
that were cut for testing.
2. Cleaning of copper chain, removal of corrosion if present, repatination of chains and
application of a paste wax coating (to be done in conjunction with step #1).
3. Partial removal of chains at the top of the sculpture, cleaning and scarifying the paint
surface, and application of a paint coating with UV protection to protect the most
vulnerable areas of the fiberglass from additional deterioration from UV.
STEP 1 – CHAIN REPAIR AND REPAIR OF AREAS OR FIBERGLASS REMOVAL DURING
TESTING:
A. Chains will be worked on in situ with only partial removal as needed for replacing
connectors.
B. Conservator will develop a labeling system to track sections of chains that are treated.
C. All work will be documented with photographs before, during and after treatment.
D. A lift will be used to adequately access areas.
E. All rusty wires and inappropriate connectors that can be safely accessed without
damaging fiberglass will be removed. New fasteners should be marine-grade bronze or
316 marine-grade stainless steel that is coated to prevent direct contact with the copper.
a. If ties are required, they should be of the same gauge copper wire as was
originally used.
b. No ferrous metal will be used.
F. Removed material will be saved and labeled.
G. Areas where fiberglass was removed, will be patched with fiberglass and resin such as
polyester or epoxy that will provide the maximum match in appearance and texture.
H. Patched areas will be painted to match surrounding areas.
I. A treatment report will be written documenting all processes used and providing
recommendations for future maintenance.
Chain Reaction by Paul Conrad
Rosa Lowinger & Associates • September, 2015
3
STEP 2 – CLEANING, CONSERVATION, AND POSSIBLE REPATINATION OF CHAINS:
1. While work is being carried out on chains, we recommend providing maintenance to
said chains and the sculpture as a whole. Said cleaning will begin with dry brushing and
vacuuming of debris, bird droppings, and other particulates.
2. Low pressure water from a hose or pump sprayer and a conservation grade detergent
will be used to wash the artwork. The piece will be thoroughly rinsed after washing.
Pressurized air will be used to make sure that the piece is properly dried during
cleaning.
3. All chains will be checked for corrosion and corrosion cleaned mechanically. Light
patina will not be removed, only areas of corrosion which appear to be affecting the
structure of the chains.
4. Any areas of open joints or seams will be documented and addressed as an addendum to
this proposal.
5. Weep holes will be carefully examined and cleared as needed. Special care will be taken
to avoid plugging or clogging weep holes during treatment.
6. As per the artist’s estate’s recommendation, efforts will be made to restore and conserve
the blue-green surface patina on the chains that provide the color contrast that is
appropriate for this work. This work is only to be done by a conservator or technician
who can demonstrate previous experience creating patinas of this color and nature.
• Three mock ups of patina using appropriate hot chemical means will be
prepared for approval by the City. Formulas will be determined during testing.
• The chains to be tested will be degreased with organic solvents prior to
employing the patina chemicals.
• Three color mock ups will be prepared, using old imagery to be provided by
the artist’s estate or the City. The intended color is a pale blue green. The same
chemicals may be used in combination. Alternatively, different chemicals will be used.
At least one will employ cuprite nitrate as the base chemical in the formula.
7. Following application of the chemical patina samples, each sample will be partially
coated with a cold paste wax designed to protect patinated surfaces and containing no
silicone. Carnauba and or microcrystalline paste wax should be the base formulas. Wax
formulas will need to be submitted along with patina formulas. The patina should not
be saturated by the paste wax. In all this will produce six samples—three formulas each
coated and uncoated to be reviewed by the City.
8. The City will review samples and determine which ones look best. A determination will
be made whether the patination and coating is warranted.
9. Once approved, the conservator will undertake the treatment to patinate the chains and
possibly coat them with wax to protect the patina.
10. Work will be documented within the treatment report prepared for Step 1.
Chain Reaction by Paul Conrad
Rosa Lowinger & Associates • September, 2015
4
STEP 3 – REMOVAL OF CHAINS AT THE TOP AND APPLICATION OF A UV RESISTANT PAINT:
1. This step is proposed in conjunction with the aforementioned steps. It would be carried out
concurrently.
2. Research and propose a particular paint system that would be used locally at the top of the
mushroom cap only, to provide additional UV protection to the most vulnerable portion of
the artwork. Provide material specifications for approval. Purchase a small quantity in the
proposed color and provide a draw down card for color approval.
3. Remove the top portion of the chains on the sculpture. This can be done in sections so the
chains do not have to be completely disassembled and brought down from the top of the
mushroom cap.
4. Protect adjacent areas of chain as needed.
5. Clean areas of paint or dirt and grime, scarify the existing paint and degrease using organic
solvents in preparation for application of the new paint. The approximate total area of
surface to be painted is ca. 100 SF, representing only the top of the cap.
6. Apply the paint as per manufacturer’s instructions, by brushing or rolling. If paint is
catalyzed we may need to determine a different method for working on larger areas at a
time.
7. Replace chains in sections.
8. Document within the overall treatment report as a separate phase.
9. Provide all material information as part of deliverable.
Prepared by:
Rosa Lowinger and Christina Varvi
September 15, 2015
Note: RLA will provide all labor, materials and standard liability insurance for this work. RLA carries
liability insurance in the amount of $4,000,000.00 total, $2,000,000.00 per incident . The client will provide
access to water, electricity, parking for one car adjacent to the site, and sanitary facilities. If not provided,
additional equipment costs may be necessary. No special insurance, permits, fingerprinting, background
checks or other bonds and licenses are included in estimates. Work will be carried out in continuous sessions
during daytime working hours between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM. Rate is not calculated using
prevailing wage figures and does not include fencing costs or City of Santa Monica tax.