Community Commentary -- Linda Dixon

I would like to respond to columnist Byron de Arakal concerning his

viewpoints on the Noguchi Gardens (“Of Oompa Loompas and the Unreal

Noguchi Follies,” April 4). The column suggests that public art should

not stand in the way of development, and that attempts to protect such

art are frivolous and illogical.

I disagree with de Arakal on this, as do many, many people concerned

with saving Isamu Noguchi’s “California Scenario,” one of the few areas

containing contemporary landscape sculpture in Orange County.

It is my desire to protect public art to the maximum extent possible.

There are, of course, aesthetic considerations, respect for the

contribution of the artist and legal implications. The Costa Mesa City

Council has received numerous letters imploring the city to reject any

plan that leaves the California Scenario vulnerable to destruction at any

time in the future.

As Gary Dwyer, World Heritage Photographer for United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) recently

noted, “There are more eyes on Costa Mesa than you might have originally

imagined.”

De Arakal weighs the developer’s responsibilities and past

contributions to the arts and to the city -- including his deeding land

to the city for a street and freeway offramp that will ultimately benefit

his development -- against the artistic significance and the preservation

of “California Scenario.”

He suggests that enhancing the value of real estate is always more

important than the preservation of public art.

I wonder if the National Gallery would still be in existence for the

public to enjoy if de Arakal’s philosophy took precedence. Public art is

one of our country’s treasures to share among people from all walks of

life. Let us weigh this balance between profit and art carefully, and

protect and sustain what is beautiful and creative.

It seems that Jim Anderson of Commonwealth Partners and de Arakal have

discussed the project at length since all references in the column

carefully explained the pain and anguish of the developer.

It seems de Arakal failed to recognize and give any credit to the

council members and city staff who are diligently working to preserve

this unique educational park that introduces visitors to the diverse

environments of our state. I wonder why de Arakal has not requested an

interview with me and allowed me to give my perspective of the

development agreement.

At no time did de Arakal point out any of the benefits of this

proposed development project to Commonwealth Partners. Commonwealth has

requested additional land-use entitlements to build two additional office

buildings totaling 400,000-square-feet in which a real estate appraiser

estimated an increased property value of at least $25 million.

The freeway ramp land was “voluntarily” given to the city because

Commonwealth was asking for approval for two 10-story office buildings,

and the city would have required the “donation” when Commonwealth sought

approval to build the two buildings.

Last, but not least, de Arakal references Commonwealth’s financial

partner California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) “is a tad

dubious of specific demands made by certain council members regarding

Commonwealth’s obligation to protect the Gardens.”

Just because the owners and lender may not like the requirement, does

not mean it is not a needed and worthwhile benefit to the public.

So what we have is a flummoxed columnist who continues to show his

true colors. Mr. de Arakal should assimilate a bit of culture and start

working to help Costa Mesa live up to its name as “City of the Arts.”

* LINDA W. DIXON is the Costa Mesa vice mayor.