•Examine a square footage requirement for the public art trigger in residential developments, rather than a unit trigger to capture family-friendly multi-family developments.

•Revisit the 60/40 split for public art fee paid by developers in Redevelopment project previously (60% of fee stays on site, 40% of fee goes to the AiPP fund) for larger value projects

•Develop maintenance contract with developers to ensure city approves movement of pieces before they are moved, and proper maintenance occurs on a regular basis.

•Examine the possibility of altering the ordinance to require public art placement to be on the exterior rather than in publicly accessible interior spaces.

•Work with the City Attorney to determine the best way to regulate and assess fee to “missing” pieces.

•Require developers to net out costs of items like doors, rails, bollards, etc. to ensure, if using as a portion of the art requirement, that it constitutes art, and the money dedicated to those items is deducted from the requirement.

•Consider approval thresholds for either staff, Planning Commission or PAC review of art on a large façade, in gateway sites or on sites with development over a certain dollar threshold. Review could exclude the nature of the art, but include consideration of exterior vs. interior priorities, value of architectural features to be credited toward additional art investment, and/or materials/typology to be prioritized.

•Re-examine possibility of density bonuses or property tax reduction if more than the required contributions is dedicated for to the creation and maintenance of space for the arts (both installations and low cost gallery spaces).