12.12.16 committee comments

This is a summary of committee feedback from our 12.12.16 meeting...

Initial question about conceptual linkage between elements (‘flow’ concept that runs through all…flow of water, flow of infrastructure, flow of nature, flora, fauna, fossils, trails, etc)

Questions about budget as it relates to scope of individual projects (description of one large piece ‘flume’ and 3 medium pieces and 3 smaller pieces…with opportunity to pick & choose & group per preferences)

Interest in getting First People’s impact woven into project narrative

Interest in landscaping (camas, other plantings)

Someone mentioned preference for mural, benches and birdboxes with narrative tie (poetry) running through each piece

Interest in expanding budget (with supplemental public and/or private $)

Concerns about maintenance issues/budget – discussion of lifespan and ephemerality – questions about jurisdiction (who cares for what) and location of work (visibility)

Lots of interest/support for bluebird boxes

Iconic nature of the work (particularly ‘flume’ and ‘blue tree’) could be a draw to the park

Refinement questions about ‘flume’ – lots of interest in this piece – questions about finish of piece (rust vs painted) – blue theme tie-in – potential for lighting

Interest in the big boulder & bike rack – question about graffiti – possibility of painting it blue

Interest in the blue tree – concerns about health of tree

Pump house murals question: any thought about simplifying design?  Concern about stylistic clash with mural artist – changing nature of mentorship to assisting artist (me) to achieve over esthetic cohesion

Folks liked the idea of possibly combining the bio boulders and bike racks but not each individually

There were concerns that the model of bike rack proposed was not actually best practice in bike safety/security – need more information about best practice

People liked the idea of memorializing the flume, and thought the Flume piece would be a statement piece drawing people to the park

Although panelists appreciated the potential mentoring of other artists, overall the mural project did not appeal to many; there was concern that the aesthetic of the fence would ruin any mural work anyways; Water City employees who care for those buildings have a difficult time maintaining murals and cleaning them when there is graffiti; people appreciated the architecture as is

The blue tree would encourage tourism and social media activity, but people are also very sensitive about what happens to trees

The panel wanted to make sure any temporary or low-visibility projects were paired with a permanent high visibility piece

The benches or bio boulders could become part of the Flume piece, bringing together several of the ideas into one area to maximize impact

A panelist noted that the projects didn’t feel unique to this site and artist as many have happened elsewhere, but there was also understanding that we are still in the early stages of conceptual development

People liked the blue bird houses but wanted them to feel designed and aesthetically engaging, and thought it would be best to seek funding elsewhere for them rather than use the public art money to pay for them; there were also questions about who would maintain them and the need for community stewardship

other possibilities

There are a few options within the aforementioned projects that would allow for ongoing community engagement and stewardship.  While they include such items as the bluebird boxes, babbling benches and pump house murals; there’s additional opportunities related to garden flowers (flume and bio boulders) and tree plantings (babbling benches vignettes).  Beyond this is the opportunity to tie into some community event such as the Tacoma Arts Month Opening Party or to create a hands-on workshop at the STAR Center.  An accompanying website will provide background information on the overall project.

There are also different approaches we could take to any of the described projects in terms of exact execution.  For example, it may be more cost-effective and engaging to build a sculptural structure on-site with smaller, less expensive stonework in the case of the bio boulder project.  Or, in the case of the flume project, an alternate placement (perhaps in or near the new swale) or approach to the work (a sculptural buoy?) may open up an opportunity to engage with the local school community.

babbling benches

Though there’s 4 benches scattered over the length of the Water Flume Line Trail, interjecting 3-4 stone benches engraved with text may provide another opportunity for weaving meaning into the overall project.  Thinking this could be a chance to engage a local poet to create a few select words that resonate with a ‘flowing’ theme.  A sort of ‘words writ in water’ homage to South Tacoma engraved in granite stone artisan benches strategically-placed along the trail.

bluebird boxes

A community engagement project that could engage birdwatchers, environmental and neighborhood activists, students and other community members working together to help bring back Western Bluebirds.  A similar project that was originally launched on Vancouver Island helped bring back blue birds in that area from near-extinction.  By creating nesting boxes, the group was able to provide inviting shelters for the birds whose natural habitat is Garry Oaks.

A project highlighting and helping these birds could prove quite popular with bird enthusiasts and residents of all ages and backgrounds.  There could also be spinoff projects involving bird identification hikes, bird call field recording expeditions, periodic box maintenance work parties, annual bird counting efforts, etc.  Esthetic tie-ins with the other blue-themed aspects of the overall project (Water Flume Trail, Pump House Murals, blue flowered plants, blue stones, etc.) would reinforce the life-source connections in ways large and small.

http://www.goert.ca/activities/bluebirds/