HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary_2_2015_Minutes Minutes: Art in Public Places Board Meeting
Monday, February 2, 2015, 8:30 a.m.,Town Council Chambers
AIPP board members present: Cookie Flaum, Julie Hansen, Kathy Langenwalter, Dana Patterson, Bill
Pierce, Kara Woods, Amanda Zinn
AIPP Board members absent: Jen Mason, Wendy St. Charles
Others present: Molly Eppard AIPP Coordinator, Margaret Rogers – Town Council Rep
1. Approval of minutes from December 1 meeting. No quorum at the January 5 meeting.
2. No citizen input.
3. Tom Kassmel, Town of Vail, I-70 underpass project update
Tom presents the conceptual rendering of the I-70 underpass project to the board. The town has been working
jointly with CDOT on this project for the past couple of years going through the public process. It is to be
located between main Vail and west Vail. He would like to get feedback from the AIPP board about potential
public art opportunities with the project and what a budget for that might be assuming it moves forward. It is
presently over budget and he will be going to both the town and CDOT in early May for additional funding and
therefore would like to have an understanding if a public art element would be included. This video 3D
rendering has been presented in several public meetings and open houses. It will help to serve the board a
better understanding of the scope of the project. Tom orients the board to the exact location of the project. The
underpass itself can be a potential art location to beautify it. There is also a railing along the south edge of the
walk. The railing will need to shield headlight glare. These are the two locations that have been discussed as
potential locations thus far. He points out the retaining walls which will be stone veneered, as well as
landscape design. There will be a double tiered wall on both the west and east sides of the underpass. It is
somewhat similar to the west Vail roundabouts with a walkway beneath. He then shows the view from the
south with the retaining wall and railing that would screen headlights as a potential opportunity for art. It is
either going to be 42 or 54 inches depending if they make it pedestrian or bicycle safe. Julie asks if the
roundabouts would be available for public art. Tom confirms that it could be used, but now we are looking at
landscaping. Right now we do not have a specific budget for art as it is a joint project. It would be a betterment
that the town would add to the project. It is something that we would like to bring to the town with the
approximate budget that would have to be allocated. Margaret shows images of mosaic tiles that are in a
pedestrian tunnel in Chicago. The mural is a taste of what you will see after exiting the tunnel. Margaret
comments that if we incorporate art in the underpass then we would save the money on the stone veneer.
While we would incur the cost of an art project we will save money on the stone if we focus on the underpass.
Bill thinks it would be important to dramatize the movement of traveling through the space and motion similar to
the tunnels at the airport. Molly comments that several of the images in the “Art-spiration” for the skatepark are
actually of underpasses because she was looking for similar images working with the rawness of concrete.
Kathy comments that by incorporating art into a necessary function of the project it would make most sense.
Molly asks if there would be an issue with CDOT in not having the stone veneer. Tom said that the stone is in
the budget, so we can look at how the costs might benefit the project. It should not be an issue because it is
truly just aesthetic. We would be responsible as the town to maintain any art project. Molly asks what his
recommendations might be. Tom explains that snow will be plowed, but we would want to be practical. Kathy
confirms that we are looking at a budget number. In the next couple of months we would like to show council
some options that can be presented with an approximate budget. We want them going in knowing as much as
possible. Margaret comments that cost will be an issue, so we need to be clear up front what the realistic costs
will be. Molly asks Tom for the exact dimensions. Bill confirms that the purpose of today is to establish a
reasonable budget. Tom comments that he does not need the number today, but will by May. Molly informs the
board that the mural at Lionshead was approximately $80,000. Construction cost is $20,000,000, if they would
like to establish 1%, it would be $200,000. If the board thinks more would be needed to do it right, then they
can request a more appropriate amount. Kathy comments that we will review the skatepark images and further
discuss the underpass project to establish a budget in the coming months. The board thanks Tom.
4. Todd Oppenheimer, Town of Vail, Vail Skate Park update
Todd updates the board on where the town is with the skatepark design process. They have 11 responses
from the RFQ that was issued to the skatepark community. They have reviewed the responses and have
requested RFPs to 6 of the 11 companies. The group now reviewing the RFPs is: Chad Young with Vail Rec
Youth Programs; Mike Dunlap an older skater who is with Garfinkle’s and was involved with Edwards
skatepark and the temporary Vail skatepark; CJ Polen is a skateboard instructor for Vail Rec and knows what
the youth and beginners will need in a skatepark; and Cameron Chaney who is a student at the Ski and
Snowboard Academy and has been integral in the project and preliminary design work. The proposals are due
in the middle of the month. The 6 will likely be weeded down to a couple of finalists. Molly starts the slide
presentation for the skate park. Molly also welcomes Dr. John Feigen who is present in the meeting today to
discuss the skatepark. Todd describes the space as 230 feet long and 25 feet wide between the two stair
towers of the Lionshead parking structure. The grade would be made even with a base elevation in this space.
The spandrel walls on top and bottom will go down to footing. Martin & Martin, a civil and structural engineering
company out of Avon, is also working on the project and evaluating various scenarios. Todd shows the
preliminary design that American Ramp Company provided. This serves to show that a skatepark can indeed
work in this space and location, it is not the design. It helps to prove that it is possible. Molly asks the board to
begin thinking of possibilities by looking through the skatepark images she pulled for “Art-spiration.” Margaret
asks if the image is dyed concrete or painted. Molly and Todd comment that paint on the bottom surface would
not hold up well over time and usage. Another image shows artistic grind rails. Kathy confirms that the
materials will be concrete. Todd explains that it will predominantly be concrete, but there will be some steel and
perhaps some stone. Molly also shows some sculptural elements that incorporate skate boards. Todd
comments that painted surfaces will look nice when they are new, but there will be lots of marks and scrapes
from everyday use. Molly mentions that we may want to look at back wall surfaces that are not intended to be
skated upon. Todd says that Mike Dunlap recommended not painting surfaces because people add their
touches. The clean concrete surfaces tend to stay clean concrete surfaces free of graffiti. The stair towers and
spandrel walls and the space itself, the air between the structures can be utilized for art. Molly continues to
show the “Art-spiration” photos of skateparks and underpasses. Bill describes the images that he submitted of
the Coronado Bridge in California. It was a variety of artists who painted the area and it is free of getting
tagged. One of the images that Molly discusses is of a man maintaining the steel rails with a vibrant color. She
comments that the use of vibrant color will enhance the space. The board comments on an interesting image
where a mural is created by using colorful bottle caps to create a mosaic type of mural. Molly comments on
William Thompson’s images who was recommended by Cameron. He is the artist who created a mural for the
Lionshead skatepark project. Molly asks Todd where we are as far as budget. Todd explains that he has
discussed the preliminary numbers with the Council back in August. The budget for just the skatepark itself is
$600,000. This is the number that came with the preliminary design by American Ramp. Overall they have
talked about a $1,500,000 which is all inclusive in the project. It includes a $50,000 dedicated to public art. This
is what has been spoken with the Council previously. Margaret asks if we can get a sponsor for the art project
aspect of the skatepark. Vans, Woodward, and Tony Hawk are discussed as possibilities. In the RFP AIPP is
noted as an aspect of the skatepark. It will be a cooperative alliance at the end of the day. The design should
be finalized by late spring. The Council needs to authorize the final budget, as they have been taking
incremental steps to ensure that it is going to be feasible. Margaret also compliments the creative team at
public works who created the ski planters and ski trees as possible artists. Todd asks the board to brainstorm
on artistic possibilities for the skatepark. Kathy confirms that we should look at vertical spaces, but Todd thinks
that we should keep open minded and talk to the selected skatepark company when it comes that time. Dr.
Feigen introduces himself and he is present to discuss two view points on the construction of this new
skatepark. He comments that from his research that skateparks are a healthy addition of an activity to any
community. He then comments on Warren Miller’s skatepark at Orcas Island. He reviewed the skatepark with
Warren Miller and how it fit into the community of the San Juan Islands. Miller’s skatepark is a beautiful form of
both construction and usage. In looking at skateparks around the country, it inspired Dr. Feignen to study the
beauty and how it plays into the function. We know that we need world class function in Vail. He comments
that kids in motion in a community is in itself beautiful versus kids standing around bored. Molly asks if Warren
Miller would want to sponsor the art. Dr. Feigen says that it might be a possibility for a naming opportunity
given his time and contribution to the Vail community. Kara asks if art can be affixed to the top tiers. Todd
thinks it could happen, but it would just require the correct structuring and support. The board comments that
the vertical space could use interesting light. Todd agrees.
6. Todd Oppenheimer, Town of Vail, Ford Park entry portals update
Todd explains that we are in the final phases that we need to accomplish at Ford Park: entry portals and a way
finding system throughout the park. Todd discusses the ways in which people get lost en route to the park and
even once inside the park. A good intuitive way finding system would go a long way. The entry portals were
discussed with the master planning stages of the park, but never truly conceived at the time. The budget has
been reduced as a place holder. The questions today: Does AIPP see this as an opportunity for art or is it more
way finding? There are several portals to the park, so they need to be prioritized. What is the message that the
portals need to convey to the public? There is currently $250,000 in the budget for portals and $60,000 for way
finding. Kathy asks why the way finding cannot be a clear map versus complicated signage. The visual of the
map would be much easier than multiple signs. Todd shows the entrance gate designed by Wopo Holup to the
Betty Ford Alpine Garden which ended up costing $80,000. The artist had a minimal fee of $4,000 within the
budget. Todd identifies the portal locations: the pedestrian east and west end of Betty Ford Way; Sports
Central by the concession stand; Nature Center Bridge; the stream walk by Vail Valley Drive; the Manor Vail
entrance on Vail Valley Drive and towards the Manor Vail Covered Bridge; for vehicles the parking lot
entrance; and the Soccer Field. These locations will have different priorities. Julie asks Todd about consistent
branding for Ford Park. Molly comments that is why we are gathering today to discuss that branding with the
portal concept. Todd points out the portal locations on a map of Ford Park. What is the message of the
portals? You have arrived at Ford Park. You have arrived and this is what you will find. Or plus, here are the
events for the day. He shows various concepts of arrival: an archway, a monument sign, an architectural kiosk
and informational sign, variable message signs. He then shows images of way finding packages throughout
town which are well received. This can be carried through Ford Park or you can initiate a new way finding that
is tied to the portals from a design standpoint. Today he is looking for thoughts and suggestions. Amanda
remarks that the park is a cultural center of Vail so we should have artistic portals. Dana agrees. She sees an
artistic opportunity for the entrances versus the way finding. She thinks the way finding can be consistent with
the town. Kara thinks the portals should be artistic while the way finding should be the town. She thinks we
should keep the portals clean and artistic. Julie thinks we should brand Ford Park with consistent artistic
portals at the entry points. She remarks that she does like the current blade signs with direction. Bill thinks we
should use some identification for the portals, but we should prioritize which we are focusing upon. He thinks
we should be careful about emphasizing and rather deemphasize where we are over signed and installing
them in more appropriate locations. Margaret thinks we need to be mindful of the portals, so they identify
pedestrian entry points even if it is not meant for common vehicular traffic specifically the west Betty Ford Way.
Todd agrees that it is appropriate for a pedestrian entrance. She agrees with Kathy about the maps as a way
finding element. The amphitheater has created a theme with a contemporary stone structure and Ford Family
Tribute. Molly comments that the last time we discussed this, we remarked on reaching out to Andy Dufford for
the portals. He is the artist of the Ford Family Tribute. Todd comments that Zehren brought Andy into the
amphitheater project. Kathy thinks the way finding should be incorporated into the portals. She thinks that the
blades are too urban for the park setting. She thinks that there can be more creative ways rather than
directional blades. She thinks a visual guide will be helpful versus having the day’s events. She thinks we
should start with Andy to discuss the portals. Bill thinks it should be thematic to what we have already in Ford
Park without adding something new. Greg Hall, director of public works, comments that there is a way finding
advisory committee already in place. He explains the way finding gets you to Ford Park. Once you arrived, how
do you find where you need to be? There may be a new RFP for way finding within the park. With regard to art,
a full call will be a lengthy process. He thinks that working with an artist to come up the concept small or large
and theme, that there can be cost savings. We can reach out to a few artists with good guidelines using the
existing materials. With regard to way finding, the other piece that has not yet been implemented is that no one
is taking ownership of the official Vail map that will exist on all printed, signs, and apps. Kathy remarks that the
map can be consistent, but only for Ford Park. Greg remarks that it is critical that we need a good consistent
map for the town. Molly comments that we should leave the way finding and map making to the town and
advisory committee and AIPP should stick with the artistic portals. Bill questions the route for walking from the
parking structure to the park. Board members do comment that the building you travel through is quite
unattractive and can be visually enhanced. Molly comments that we did get a proposal for painting that building
in an attractive alpine manner. Julie and Bill comment the Bridge Street stream walk should also have a portal
or marker as the beginning of the stream walk to Ford Park from Vail Village.
7. Coordinator updates:
Molly explains to the board that the Covered Bridge installation for 2015 has fallen apart. Morgan
Riddell, Mountainside Productions, never got the sound bites that we directed him to at our November
meeting. Unfortunately, he never got the recordings for a polished art installation from the Birds of Prey
races. He never got the welcomes in other languages, as there was an incident and Jen Mason actually
recorded what he passed along. In the end, Molly sent him Welcome translated in all of the 70
languages asking that it be projected on the floor of the bridge or at the northern entrance and he never
responded. While we were promised that the installation would be feasible, it was never produced to
our standards. Molly did ask Nathan Cox this week if he could project the welcomes, but he is slammed
with other 2015 obligations. Molly comments that she would rather not have anything if it is not
polished. It is a shame that we are missing out on an installation for 2015. Julie observed that it was art
by consensus which may have confused him at the meeting and the Covered Bridge trial. Molly
remarks that she sent pointed instructions to him prior to the January meeting of what was envisioned.
She comments that he brought it upon himself to introduce the video as another layer that was not
requested. She feels that he should have focused on what we asked him what to do over three months,
including the coach sound, cowbell, cheer, skier sound. He never told us that he didn’t get this sound
until last week. Julie comments that he never showed us the up lighting and movement of light on the
Bridge as well. Molly comments that after reviewing all of our minutes we were very clear for direction
of the project, but he never brought these options to us which cost us the project. Margaret comments
that it is an embarrassment as the public was anticipating the project.
Triumph/Logan Winterfest 2014/15 – the ice sculptures are still standing. Molly explains that the cattle
guards are present because of the warm January temperatures. The spell of warm weather has caused
the snow melt beneath the sculptures has compromised the sculptures integrity. Molly comments that
weather did not agree with this installation and since we recognize it, we need to be cautious with
public safety and interaction. Obviously it detracts from the installation, but public safety is a priority.
Dana remarks that people have still been enjoying it and she sees people all day taking their
photographs in front of the sculptures. Julie remarks that she was surprised by the vertical design.
Molly remarks that it should be considered when the proposals are being presented. Molly remarks that
the warm temps have not agreed with the ice sculptures. It has been something that we discuss weekly
with public works and the artist. Margaret remarks that we should notice the weather cycle that we have
seen over the past few years and install earlier in December. Molly agrees that we should look at
installing earlier. Molly comments that we need to be mindful of the direct sun exposure and perhaps
move the installation further west on the Gore Creek.
Celebration at Sweet Basil went well.
An RFP has been sent regarding the tree lighting from CSE. There is strong interest in continuing the
paper lantern project and having it grow.
Art Walks began Wednesday with an attendance of 20.
Meeting adjourned.