Downtown Sioux Falls

You didn’t pay for it, so call a Whambulance

I found this comment about the new PUBLIC art piece at the Steel District interesting, especially the last sentence.

I don’t care who paid for it, it is sitting in the public square, which would make it PUBLIC art. It actually did cost us. We provided a $21.5 million TIF package*, which included $9.4 million in Site Improvements.  

My recollection is that either included in that amount for Site Improvements (or designated elsewhere in the City budget?) was earmarked for art in public places at The Steel District.

This is why public art must go thru a vetting process NO MATTER who is paying for it. What if Denny Sanford wanted to construct a massive pumpkin sculpture and put it in the Federal Courthouse plaza? He’s paying for it? So what’s wrong with that? Having the donors pick the art is a bad idea. I like the piece though, it should just be painted white.

Also, I know in the past if you were a business owner and you wanted to paint a mural on your business you had to present the concept drawings and idea to the Visual Arts Commission for approval before proceeding with a building permit and sign permit. So how is this any different? Special people get Special treatment in Sioux Falls. I hope the next mayor tells this ilk to go to Heck and find some other trough to feed at.

* also included as extra is Permanent Finance Cost of up to 5% of total eligible TIF expenses (up to $1.075 million, which likely went right to the pocket of Craig Lloyd’s SIL, who is likely providing / arranging financing for the project).

More Public Art, another critique

My first critique of the sculptures is something everybody has been saying that have seen it ‘There is too much crap in that space and it just looks like the lawn sculpture garden on Cleveland Avenue’. Besides the overcrowding I would have done one of two things with the sculptures. The pieces themselves are beautiful and I think they will withstand the rigors of SD weather (I have a wait an see on that one, glass doesn’t do well in hail and subzero temps). I would have either spaced out the existing sculptures more or I would have made the bases narrower to make more space between the pieces. It goes back to the overcrowding in that space and it looks like the space between the pieces was compromised. But hey when you hire Mark Cotter’s kid with a lawnmower to prepare the site, what do you expect? I even saw them hauling in a bunch of trees today.

Speaking of city projects, looks like the ice ribbon is finally getting poured.

Public Art Critique

I have been admiring this new sculpture at the Steel District. I like the concept and the design (the cut out key hole is laying to the side of the piece) But, the yellow color doesn’t fit well in the development. I would change the color to a pearl essence iridescent paint that illuminates and sparkles in sunlight and moonlight and changes color depending on the light shining on it, I would also round the edges of the outer structure while leaving the keyhole with a straight on cut. It would give it more of an obelisk look to it. This is why ALL public art should go thru a PUBLIC vetting process even if it is privately funded. You get better art. We learned nothing from Mural-Gate when a private donor email harvester, the police chief and the mayor censored a piece that was later presented at the Smithsonian. When picking public art, a diverse jury of not only artists, but designers, contractors and other lay people help decide. This diversity gives you diverse public art. I can guarantee how this played out; The developer picked out the piece (concept drawings) and presented to the VAC ‘as is’ and they approved it. Zero vetting process. Money doesn’t buy class or taste.