Comments on: Art Commission Supports “PowerArt” Project

By: Curious

Curious — Thu, 03 Oct 2013 01:56:52 +0000

The city leaders and their buddies on all the commissions continue to dodge the bullet in this overly trustful and/or apathetic community. The vote against the public art millage left the PerCent for Art program intact, then, in large part due to community opinion and problematic political infighting between people who wanted to stop wasting money and people who couldn’t get enough of wasting it, the percent for art program was ended (while still leaving almost a MILLION dollars for its “administration.” Now they STILL have this public art waste program whereby anyone can decide they can spend ANY amount of money on public art to be “baked in.” END THE PUBLIC ART PROGRAM. DISBAND THE PUBLIC ART COMMISSION.

By: Mark Tucker

Mark Tucker — Wed, 02 Oct 2013 16:46:22 +0000

The idea that offering an assortment of public plumbing fixtures, electrical control boxes, sewer covers, etc., as an ideal place to showcase artistic talent has run its course and now verges on being disrespectful to artists. I wish this type of “gallery” for creative content would cease to exist. Dangling carrots in front of artists to decorate canoes, paint fiberglass cows/horses/footballs(hockey pucks next?)has little to do with supporting the arts and everything to do with trying to generate tourism and deflect graffiti. We’ve all seen it before in other cities–the peeling ones are the best–so rehashing these themes here in Ann Arbor seems truly unimaginative. If we would just concentrate on soliciting talented artists, and pay attention to what they wish to create and where they want to present their creations, we might actually end up with public artwork in this town worth championing–and seeing.

By: Donald J. Salberg

Donald J. Salberg — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 19:28:50 +0000

I share Kathy Griswold’s concern about the traffic box artwork presenting a distraction to drivers passing by. Similar concerns were voiced about placing large electronic advertising billboards on school property adjacent to busy roadways. The Ann Arbor Public School administration rejected the signs for safety reasons.

In addition, I find the traffic box artwork created by David Spear, which is pictured above, to be ugly and I am concerned about the art selection process used to place artwork anywhere in Ann Arbor.

Thank you,

Don Salberg

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 14:05:02 +0000

An earlier program involved painting fire hydrants. The result, in my opinion, has been visual clutter. We are introducing ugliness into our landscape, not beauty.

The DDA should attend to sidewalks and leave “art” alone.

By: Kathy Griswold

Kathy Griswold — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 13:48:13 +0000

I recommend a review by City traffic (transportation) engineering before we place art near intersections and crosswalks. Some of the existing utility boxes block sight distance at intersections, including the utility box for the new hawk signal on Jackson. Art will create an additional distraction and may make it more difficult for drivers to differentiate a person next to or behind the box from the art.

Pedestrian crashes have increased in Ann Arbor to 60 in 2012 and 63 in 2011 from 45 in 2010 and 42 in 2009, per MichiganTrafficCrashFacts.org. We must adhere to national best practices in transportation engineering and place the art where it enhances the downtown environment.

By: Alan Goldsmith

Alan Goldsmith — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 11:52:31 +0000

“For example, she said, the city attorney’s office has told AAPAC that it can’t limit the artist solicitations to local residents – the call for proposals must be open to artists nationally.”

Could we see a copy of this written guidance or was it the usual ‘verbal’ no paper trail advice?

By: Mark Koroi

Mark Koroi — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 01:24:08 +0000

I have opposed the One Per Cent For Art ordinance on the grounds that it is not legal. A number of persons, including Councilperson Steve Kunselman, have voiced doubts regarding the legality of the program.

Here is a good analysis of the legality of the ordinance:

http://www.localannarbor.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/taxes-for-art/

By: Janet James

Janet James — Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:28:40 +0000

“Partnership with Ann Arbor DDA, Arts Alliance would put artwork on downtown traffic signal boxes” -clearly too much money in the hands of the DDA and the Arts Commission. It is really time for both of them to be disbanded.

By: abc

abc — Mon, 30 Sep 2013 20:40:17 +0000

I have not made it all the way through this piece yet but I did get through the PowerArt part and I also looked at Boise’s program. Did anyone on the AAPAC notice that Boise stuck art on about 40 things in a 100 acre area of the city and we are proposing to do this to 40 things in a 600 acre area of our city? Do you think that that might make for a different experience?