News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 5.8K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 7.5K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 4.4K     0 

Urban Development and Proposals Discussion

FCC1982 said:
Donā€™t even go there.
Itā€™s being re-assessed as I understand it after some less than beloved installations.
Click to expand...

I like the art program but the tweak I would suggest is when the infrastructure is not well suited for public enjoyment (ie an interchange) that the funding flow to the nearest adjacent community or communities rather than putting the art where it can only be seen at 100 km/h.

Edit: although I do like the 'textures' that are put on some interchanges, ie like the glenbow fish, I think that's all that is needed to beautify that sort of infrastructure.
 
Last edited:
JoeUrban said:
I like the art program but the tweak I would suggest is when the infrastructure is not well suited for public enjoyment (ie an interchange) that the funding flow to the nearest adjacent community or communities rather than putting the art where it can only be seen at 100 km/h.

Edit: although I do like the 'textures' that are put on some interchanges, ie like the glenbow fish, I think that's all that is needed to beautify that sort of infrastructure.
Click to expand...
This wonā€™t work though for infrastructure funded by other levels of government, which is the majority. Funding is tied to the location.
 
JoeUrban said:
I like the art program but the tweak I would suggest is when the infrastructure is not well suited for public enjoyment (ie an interchange) that the funding flow to the nearest adjacent community or communities rather than putting the art where it can only be seen at 100 km/h.

Edit: although I do like the 'textures' that are put on some interchanges, ie like the glenbow fish, I think that's all that is needed to beautify that sort of infrastructure.
Click to expand...
Enjoying public art at 100 km/h is a safety risk.

Calgary's public art program has been a disaster:
-despite an alleged review panel, several issues (ex. plagiarized photos on 5th Ave underpass, culturally insensitive rock platforms at Bowfort) slipped through
-much of the art looks like tacked on afterthoughts (ex. blue hoop)
-potential of roadside art targeted at drivers to cause distraction and create safety issues
-potential of roadside art targeted at drivers to be completely overlooked by drivers

As mentioned, a better approach would be:
-focus the art on the surrounding pedestrian realm (ex. the GE5/Glenmore Causeway project has an eagle sculpture along the bike path, the pedestrian overpass close to Crowchild has an instructive piece about physics with words like "compression" embossed in the concrete)
-extend the concept of "art" to encompass design. Overpasses, for example, could have better aesthetic design. The art deco flourishes on viaducts in LA , for example, could be inspiration

I find much of the public art in places like Paris and Vienna and Montreal to be garish. Also, the statues, fountains, sculptures etc. of these cities would be completely inauthentic in Calgary. I much prefer subtle terrazzo insets etc. that relate to the purpose of the infrastructure. Hoover Dam is a great example.
 
Mountain Man said:
I like the public art program, but you definitely raise some good points. When it comes to freeways, just use the money to make the infrastructure itself less ugly, no need for something you have to take your eyes off the road to see, or miss entirely! The Stony overpasses in the SE are decent, the mountain theme makes the concrete a little less boring and isn't distracting.
Click to expand...
They follow a similar motif to I-15 through Salt Lake with the mountain outlines. Stoney for some reason painted the concrete a cream color while I-15 uses a pink that blends with the red rock landscape. Maybe the designers of Stoney were aiming for something a bit more straw colored. I-15 also has some really interesting rock garden type art that would work well in Calgary, although without a southwest theme.

Also like this approach in Melbourne (known loclally as "Jeff's Condom" after former State Premier Jeff Kennett), which is both aesthetic and functional in terms of reducing noise. Something like this on the 4th Ave flyover would look great
1618249732172.png
 
Last edited:
MissingMiddle said:
I can't help but think how much more successful (or at least less of a failure) the blue circle would have been if it was placed in a prominent urban park.
Click to expand...
Or The Bow's big head for that matter. or the former CBE's Family of Man statues. Two of our best installations with a high degree of interactivity both locked forever in a boring corporate plaza. They would make perfect additions to an urban plaza or river pathway where people could interact with them more regularly.

The route of all the issues with public art is that the art funding is connected to the location. Build lots of highway overpasses, get lots of highway overpass art. Build a big shiny office building and get a big shiny head at it's base. As others pointed out, this is dumb - it's completely divorced from where art can best be enjoyed. Melbourne's functional highway art is a cool idea, but more fundamentally - no one has ever visited Melbourne or enjoyed living there (or any city) because the highways look pretty.

I kind of get how we got here through politics. Having a public art budget disconnected from infrastructure as a standalone budget so it had the flexibility to be placed where art makes more sense would be just as much of a political lightning rod in some circles in this city as the current process. Further it could be even easier to defunded. That's not an endorsement of the current process, but understandable how it evolved as a negotiated outcome to connect the projects that get all the funding (highways) with the ones that get much less (art, sidewalks, pathways).

The key, as usual, is the public realm and pedestrian spaces. That's where art should be and where it would be best enjoyed. The Big Blue Circle is actually great and a nice bicycle ride to go check out in an otherwise fairly destination-less Nose Creek pathway - but I would have taken either a Nose Creek pathway extension further towards the edge of the city and no art or the circle located in a more prominent public park if I was offered a trade.
 
Last edited:
CBBarnett said:
Or The Bow's big head for that matter. or the former CBE's Family of Man statues. Two of our best installations with a high degree of interactivity both locked forever in a boring corporate plaza. They would make perfect additions to an urban plaza or river pathway where people could interact with them more regularly.
Click to expand...

Wonderland does attract plenty of traffic, despite its location.

I personally despise Family of Man. Not sure if it is because its monolithic proportions reinforce the brutalist bleakness of that part of DT, or maybe due to its hippie style. I reflexively hate all things hippie.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top