Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 7, 2016 Minutes Minutes: Art in Public Places Board Meeting Monday, March 7, 2016, 8:30 a.m.,Town Council Chambers AIPP board members present: Cookie Flaum, Julie Hansen, Kathy Langenwalter, Michael Kurz, Bill Pierce, Kara Woods, Amanda Zinn AIPP Board members absent: Others present: Molly Eppard AIPP Coordinator, Tom Kassmel TOV Engineer_______________________ 1. Approval of minutes from February 1 meeting. 2. No citizen input. 3. Finalist proposals for the Vail I-70 Underpass integration of public art: The three finalists are present to propose their integrated public art installations for the I70 Vail Underpass. The order of presentations is by random selection. Molly reminds the board to consider as the presentations are taking place; the proposals will evolve and will ultimately be collaborated with staff and engineers on the project. Each artist presents his/her proposal followed by questions from the AIPP Board.  Adam Kuby - proposal attached (power point) – Discussion: Julie inquires about the potential sun reflection on the back of the glare screen and whether it would be bothersome to those behind the wall. He comments that vegetation could mitigate the glare or perhaps paneling it with wood. He recommends a galvanized screen for less reflection on the metal portions of the wall. She asks to see closer images of the five panels as well. She asks Tom about the large boulders being on top with protrusion. He comments that it would require engineering due to weight. Adam recommends slicing the boulders in half and drilling the remaining halves into the wall. Kathy asks if each of the five panels is identical. He would like for them to be similar to create rhythm, but they could be different to have variation if that is the sense the board would prefer. He discusses the differences in the stones in the V and inverted V designs. The board thanks Adam for his presentation.  Gordon Huether – proposal attached (power point, scale model and glass tile, Corten steel sample materials) – Note: Gordon arrived in advance to Vail to see the location and house on the south that will be integral to the headlight glare screen aspect of the installation. Discussion: Michael asks about the depth of the wall which Gordon explains is 8 to 12 inches for the two panels. Julie asks if the tiles are illuminated – they are not. Bill asks Tom about the interest level on the north side and if the theme could be incorporated on the north side with cost savings. Tom explains that the budget is at $330,000 and if additional monies were to be applied it would have to be through a supplemental. There might be some cost savings on stone veneer which could be an option, but it is not a significant amount. Gordon comments that the landscaping is very rich already. He comments it could be an echo of what is on the north side if that is an avenue the board would like to explore. The wall on the south could be shortened as a possibility as well. He is amendable to the refinement and collaboration. He could also incorporate the tiles on the north side out of his contingency if that would be of interest. Kathy asks about the lighting. Gordon explains it is LED and offers more of a glow to the installation. You will not ever see the source of the lighting and it is a very durable installation. It is waterproof. It has a several year life-span. He would require a power source. Kathy questions the light as an element because it is to screen headlights. He acknowledges this and explains the benefit is much greater. It is less obtrusive than the street lamps and lights on the highway. The installation provides a calm glow which can be controlled with a dimmer. He believes the resident will appreciate it. The light will be a diffused glow and is calming to the headlights and street light lamps. The light can also be controlled by a timer. The snow will actually make a mountain cap on the installation. Julie asks if the light will be accessible, so they can easily be replaced. Gordon explains the lights will be accessible and they would not create anything that is cumbersome for repair and maintenance. Tom asks about the treatment of the Corten steel to stop the streaking. The artist does have a method of treating the steel which has proved well. He can also add weep holes in the cement fence to mitigate the water. Tom comments that we will inform the resident of the proposal selected and invite them to view the proposals. If the LED light is of a concern to the resident we can then address that feature. Gordon volunteers to meet with the resident should he be selected. The resident did comment at one stage they would appreciate if the art could be visible from both sides. Kathy asks about the capping where the steel is set. It will be set on the concrete wall. She asks about climbing on it and if it will cause damage and the rigidity of the steel. He comments on the strength of the steel and the method in which it will be secured. Molly comments that it creates a bit of safety given the drop on the back of the fence. It will be more difficult than an even stone wall. The board thanks Gordon for his presentation.  Vicki Scuri – proposal attached – Discussion: Julie asks if the panels have to be rectangular and if they could be able to have some more organic shapes. She thinks presently it looks like the panels are merely stacked. Vicki agrees that we can take it there with design development after input from the board. Kathy asks what she would propose should she light it. She proposes a linear fixture which would be maintenance free and she has used it on previous projects and works well. The lights could also be a community collaborative aspect of the installation and programming. She would work with Vail’s aesthetic and her vision. Molly asks about her glare screen and the height. Vicki explains the open ribbon creates an openness of the steel. Molly then asks about her method of treatment to prevent the staining on the stone. She explains that you can treat it in advance, but it will not prevent staining in time. She explains an internal drain system could be installed or to powder coat could be a solution as well. Julie asks about mag-chloride and its effects on the steel. Vicki comments that it is quite high so hopefully won’t be an issue. Tom remarks it should not be of concern. Molly comments that powder coating lasts only about 8 years in our climate. Tom comments you also have to worry about nicking the paint. Tom comments that we treated the Corten on the Lionshead Welcome Center with a patented process. Vicki then asks the board what they are looking for in the project. Kathy refers back to the criteria as listed in the RFP. The board thanks Vicki for her presentation. Board discusses and reviews the three proposals as presented by Adam Kuby, Gordon Heuther, and Vicki Scuri. Molly comments that she has only received responses back from Gordon’s references who replied immediately. Amanda: Her favorite presentation was Gordon’s. She thinks it is a great opportunity to bring his work to Vail’s collection. She likes the subtle lighting. She comments that Vicki’s artist fee was twice of the others and very similar to her previous bodies of work and was a bit static. Amanda thinks Adam’s is a bit heavy with all of the stone work. Kara: She cannot speak to Adam’s presentation. She likes that Vicki did address both sides, but felt the wall overwhelmed the art. Kara thinks Gordon’s was innovative. She would like to see something incorporated on the north side if possible. Julie: She liked all three proposals. She liked Gordon’s presentation and wished he had also looked at the north side. She would like to see how we might be able to have that work within the budget. Molly comments that his willingness to revise concepts was highlighted in his references. She likes the use of color in the tiles. Cookie: Echoes the other’s comments in that she would like to see some of Gordon’s design on the north side. She felt Adam’s proposal was a bit unfinished and uncertain, so she has concerns of how this might be reflected in his budget. She would like to work with Gordon. Bill: He liked the cross-sectioning profiles of geology on the south side and theme of Adam’s proposal. He really likes the sense of motion Gordon achieved in his parallax study. He likes that it is changing and a dynamic installation. Michael: He likes the motion in Gordon’s work and wonders if there might be more angular impact in the profile of the mountains. He thinks the lighting is cool and would be curious to see it in snow. He thinks he is very professional. He is fine that there isn’t anything on the north side. He thinks it would be a long-lasting work in Vail, but would like to see a bit more tension in the ridgeline. Kathy: She liked Adam’s work. She agrees with the board. She comments that Gordon’s feels more like a work of art versus design. She liked the glass, but would like to see a different application. Bill comments that the tile placement can be integrated into the kinetic motion of the experience as well. The board has a consensus that Gordon’s proposal embraces the project with our vision. Molly comments that it was noted that Gordon familiarized himself with the site prior to the presentation. The board unanimously votes for Gordon Huether and his presentation as the selected public artist and installation for the I70 Vail Underpass. 4. Coordinator Updates  Vail ART Pass – Molly comments that memberships will be up for renewal in June. She proposes tentative ideas for Vail ART Pass events including Anderson Ranch, Aspen Art Museum, Denver, Breckenridge and a possible reception with Valerie Theberge, the skatepark artist.  She reminds the board about the community meeting tomorrows at Donovan Pavilion.  Molly remarks about the sisterhood agreement with San Miguel de Allende and how we are exploring incorporating a cultural aspect at the Vail Arts Festival – June 24/25.  Summer programming discussion. Molly comments that the visa for the artist from the UK is becoming a bit frustrating and time consuming. We are going to continue to research how to obtain the appropriate visa for commissioning foreign artists for temporary installations. Molly will also reach out to Gravity Glue/Michael Grab from Boulder. She also thinks that we might be able to work something out with James Surls.  Molly thanks Kathy & Cookie for their eight years of service on the AIPP Board. Meeting adjourned.