Public Art

The volunteer citizen jury has selected the work "Landmark" by Simon Frank as the winning proposal.

This report is a brief overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met at Fieldcote Museum on Tuesday April 14, 2015 to review the five short-listed artist proposals, discuss public feedback on those proposals, and arrive at a final recommendation for a winner. They reviewed and derived scores for each proposal in the categories of Artistic Merit and Response to Competition Goals. They added those to Technical Merit scores recommended by City staff, and after a long discussion, came to a consensus.

According to the original call, these were the competition goals and themes:

Goal: This public art project is to enhance the 200 metre long walkway that connects Wilson Street in downtown Ancaster to Fieldcote Memorial Park. The successful work will create a visual, physical or conceptual connection from the street to the forest (and vice versa), invite use of the walkway, and be respectful of the heritage character of the Wilson Street streetscape.

Themes: The successful work should also address one or more of the following themes:

• The natural character of the area
• The history of Ancaster Village; Aboriginal, pioneer, water powered mills and/or underground railway

Award

After a very intense and heartfelt debate, the jury eventually narrowed their focus between Simon Frank and Sandor Monos’ proposals, advocating passionately for both. Simon Frank’s higher public approval and contemporary approach allowed him to edge past Monos in the scoring. The award has therefore been given to Simon Frank.

Jury comments

The Fieldcote Jury was pleased by both the wide spectrum of works offered by all contributors, particularly the five short-listed artists, spanning conceptual to representative approaches and utilizing such materials as locally gathered stone, cast bronze, laser cut aluminum, and steel, among others. It made the selection process difficult insofar as the Jury felt that each proposal had potential to succeed as a public art piece, and several had successfully navigated the tricky demands of the Fieldcote site. The Jury wishes to congratulate each of the five finalists on their efforts.

Simon Frank
The jury felt that Frank had a conceptually strong proposal that is accessible, contemporary, and poetic. They felt that approving a work with a prominent text component that has yet to be finalized was a risk; however, given the Frank’s prior work, the fact that the text would be more poetic than didactic, and that the city would have some approval over text, mitigated this risk sufficiently. The Jury strongly recommended that Frank adjust his budget to allow the sculpture’s width to increase from 3 inches to 6 inches.

Sandor Monos
The Jury felt passionately about Monos’ proposal, and have great faith in his abilities as a figurative sculpture. They particularly responded to the idea that a figurative bronze being nestled in a wooded area would be an unexpected surprise to visitors. They thought the scale of the work , and the intimacy of the figure would have been a nice enticement to children and adults to slow down and investigate the naturally setting. They agreed also that Tom Farmer was a worthy icon for this site. One slight drawback to the proposal was the fact that Ancaster already showcases more traditional, figurative sculptures. It was also noted that a future work closer to the museum building may be more appropriate to honour the Farmer family bequest of Fieldcote.

Heather Vollans
The Jury was impressed by the expertise of Vollans as a mosaic maker and commended her use of indigenous stones into her design, as well as her overall capacity to render this project to a high and durable standard. They felt that the frames holding the mosaics presented some challenges insofar as they behaved very much like conventional signage, and were accessible only from one side.

Patrick Bermingham
The Jury was quite intrigued by the Bermingham’s research and overall concept. However, they felt that there were possibly too many components to this project, some behaving less like public art and more like historical didactic. They felt that not only would such a project likely exceed the allocated budget, but was too complex and multifaceted to be understood as a single project.

Michaela McLeod
The Jury was very excited at McLeod’s contemporary and inventive approach to competition goals, and felt she had devised a unique way for people to engage with Ancaster’s topography. The biggest concern was that a project of such size and breadth deserves a context with better sight lines; that the appeal of such a design would be limited due to the constricted nature of the path along which it would be installed.

The jury

• Arthur Greenblatt - Resident and Past Director, Dundas Valley School of Art
• Susan Outlaw - Visual Artist
• Alan Bowler - Resident and Landscape Architect
• Nell Farmer-Spicer - Descendant of Fieldcote Family Bequest
• Steve Swing - Chair, Ancaster Community Council
• Karen Wilkins - Ancaster Village B.I.A.
• Tony Vieira - Arts Advisory Commission

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met at Battlefield Park on the evening of Thursday April 25, 2012 to determine which of the three short-listed proposals should be awarded the commission. Jury members reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, aboriginal community history, public consultation results and artist response to the following competition theme: 

Public art at Battlefield Park will interpret the meanings and outcomes of the Battle of Stoney Creek and the War of 1812 focusing on healing and reconciliation in a way that is meaningful and respectful both to the aboriginal community and the citizens of Hamilton. 

Award

After a great deal of discussion about various aspects of the short-listed proposals and the competition requirements, the jury assigned the highest score to The Eagles Among Us by David M. General. The commission for the work will therefore be awarded to David M. General. 

Jury comments

The jury recognized the efforts of all of the artists that made submissions to the competition. Members acknowledged that opening personal ideas, opinions and talents to public scrutiny can be difficult for artists. The jury thanks all of the artists that shared their ideas about this important subject by submitting to this competition. 

The Eagles Among Us by David M. General
The jury found this work to be the most conceptually rich of the proposals. The relationship between the four eagle figures creates an interactive and experiential aspect to the work that illustrates the competition theme of reconciliation and healing in a universal and instinctive way. This relationship continues at the detail level with the various symbols and text inscribed on each figure. This creates a richness that will encourage exploration and reflection, appeal to a diverse range of people and provide many unique opportunities for interpretation by museum staff. Several jurors and members of the public were initially concerned with the bright colours proposed by the artist but when they understood the work was to be created from four types of natural stone (granite) and that the colours presented were only diagrammatic they were more comfortable with the work. Although it was noted that this work was not a traditional piece or the type of work typically placed at heritage sites, the jury felt that it was appropriate given that it was not located directly adjacent to one of the heritage features on the site, that the use of granite gives it a memorial character in keeping with the commemorative aspects of the park and this it is of a scale visible from the street while not over whelming the other features of the park. 

The Spirit of John Norton 2014 by Gino Cavicchioli
The jury immediately recognized and commended the skill and talent of Mr. Cavicchioli as a sculptor. Although a beautiful work they noted it depends on the story of John Norton for its connection to the site and competition theme. The historian on the jury noted that John Norton was an important figure in the War of 1812. He was part Scottish and part aboriginal, was present at the Battle of Stoney Creek and was well respected by the aboriginal community and the British at the time of the battle. It was also noted that John Norton’s legacy is not well defined in the aboriginal community today. Due to events later in his life, many in the aboriginal community see him as a much more complex figure than the hero or peacemaker as implied by this work. Although the jury agreed that this was an appropriate site for a monument dedicated to John Norton and that his story deserves more attention, the majority felt that this proposal presented a limited interpretation of the competition theme and the story of John Norton. The jury noted that the proposed location of the work, its dark colour and the lack of pathways or landscaping around the work may limit its visibility from the street. The jury also felt that without a description of the life of John Norton, which the artist indicated he was reluctant to include, the work would not be as meaningful or impactful to the casual visitor to the site as perhaps intended by the artist. 

Wampum Belt Structure and Medicine Wheel Plaza by Vilnis Cultural Design Works
The jury found that this work was very well developed from a technical perspective. The proposal employs many of the same symbols and ideas as the Eagles Among Us however they are not as well developed. The proposal features a wall or screen which was not seen as welcoming or interactive as the design proposed by winning proposal. 

The jury

• Al Bridge - Friends of Battlefield Park
• Tobi Bruce - City of Hamilton Arts Advisory Commission/ Senior Curator AGH
• Les Drysdale - Artist/ City of Hamilton Public Art Competition winner
• James Elliott - Historian and Author
• Tom Hill - Aboriginal Artist and Curator
• Yvonne Maracle - Artist/ Hamilton Executive Directors’ Aboriginal Coalition
• Joseph Trombetta - Titan Mortgages/ Stoney Creek B.I.A.
• Craig Williams - Artist/ Battle of Stoney Creek Re-enactors 

Advisors to the jury

• Rick Hill - Six Nations Legacy Consortium
• Keith Jamison - Six Nations Legacy Consortium
• Marnie Maslin - City of Hamilton, Curatorial Assistant Battlefield House Museum
• Susan Ramsay - City of Hamilton, Curator Battlefield House Museum
• Kara Bunn - City of Hamilton Landscape Architect, Public Works
• Therese Charbonneau - City of Hamilton Conservator, Tourism and Culture
• Meghan House - City of Hamilton Heritage Planner, Planning
• Ken Coit (Facilitator) - City of Hamilton Public Art Coordinator, Tourism and Culture

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met on the evening of May 21, 2014 to determine which of the six short-listed artists’ proposals for a mural in Carter Park should be implemented. They reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, public consultation results and in response to the following competition goal and themes:

Goal: That the proposed art work should be vibrant and welcoming as well as provide a sense of space and depth to help minimize the negative effects of the large concrete structure of the Claremont Access on the park.

Themes: The subject of the mural should be reflective of an aspect of one or more of the following themes: 

• The rich history of the park and Stinson Neighbourhood 
• The natural character of the park 
• A sense of a community in transition through gathering, youth and recreation. 

Award

After a great deal of discussion about various aspects of the short-listed proposals and most specifically about the Bryce Huffman and Bruno Capolongo proposals the jury assigned the highest score to the proposal by Bryce Huffman. The commission for the work will therefore be awarded to Bryce Huffman. 

Jury comments

The jury members applauded the efforts of all of the thirty-one artists that made submissions to the competition. There were many excellent proposals. Opening personal ideas and talents to public scrutiny can be difficult and the jury therefore extended their thanks to all of the artists that shared their ideas by submitting to this competition, especially those making their first submission to a public art competition.

The jury also noted the large response to public consultation on this project. They extended their thanks to all 750 people that took the time to review the short-listed submissions and provide their opinions and comments.

Given the large number of high quality submissions, the decision as to which six to short list and to select the single winning proposal was very challenging. The following comments outline the jury’s discussion for the six short-listed proposals: 

Bryce Huffman 
The jury felt that this proposal most successfully addressed the project goal and all of the project themes in a playful and colourful way. Its playful character will appeal to area youth and responds well to the recreation and play areas that are important and well used parts of the park. The work also addresses the natural and historical character of the area through the depiction of urban animals and the tower of the Hamilton Collegiate Institute. It was well received by the community during public consultation. The jury did have minor concerns about the accuracy of the depiction of the Hamilton Collegiate Institute tower and requested that the artist incorporate features in the final mural that better recall the detail of the historic building. Overall the jury felt that this was the best response to the project and therefore scored it highest.

The Gateway, Bruno Capolongo with Ed Kowalski 
The jury commented that this was the most ambitious and technically difficult of the murals proposed, obviously created by talented and skilled artists. They noted that this work also responded best to the goal of the project to provide a sense of space and depth. While the proposal very successfully posits a serene and calm vision that extends the natural character of the park, it may not have addressed other aspects of the project goal and themes as successfully. Some members of the jury and the public thought that it was not as vibrant as other proposals. There was also concern that the serene and peaceful character of the mural would be at odds with the recreational use in the park such as the basketball court located directly in front of it. It was also noted that a basketball net and backboard will be located a couple of metres in front of the illusionary gateway and may take away from the effect of the work. Although the proposal was well received by the public and received high artistic excellence scores it was scored slightly lower than the winning proposal in terms of its response to context due to the concerns with the basketball court. 

Kathleen O’Hagen with Michael Christie and Daniel Seagrave/ Portman Art 
Both of these artists proposals were scored well for addressing the goals and themes of the competition but were not as well received as the by the public. They were therefore not scored 
as highly as the previous two proposals.

Lesia Mokrycke and Jeff Mann 
Both of these artists proposed bold visions that reflected very well one aspect of the goal or a theme of the competition. They were therefore scored highly for artistic excellence. They were 
not as well received during public consultation and were therefore scored lower in regards to the competition themes and consultation than the other proposals. 

The jury

• Brian Goodman - Stinson Resident 

• Erika Morton - Stinson Community Association 

• Jocelyn McKeown - Arts Professional/Stinson Resident 

• Karen Logan - City of Hamilton Arts Advisory Commission 

• Linda Quest - Stinson Resident (partial attendance) 

• Ralph Meiers - Stinson Community Association 

• Tor Lukasik-Foss - Artist, author and former Hamilton public art competition winner 

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met on the evening of Tuesday August 13^th, 2019 to determine which of the six (6) shortlisted artists’ proposals for Electrical Boxes in Downtown Hamilton should be implemented. They reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, public consultation results and in response to the following competition goal:

Utility box public art in the Downtown Hamilton Community Improvement Area (DHCIPA) should be vibrant, positive and reflective of Hamilton’s downtown.

The jury also reviewed submissions for how successfully they addressed one or more of the following themes identified by artists, local residents and business owners:

• Hamilton Through the Ages
• Hamilton Stories
• Hamilton Communities / Street Life

Award

After a discussing the various aspects of the six (6) shortlisted proposals the jury gave the highest overall score to the proposal Hamilton Enchanted by Charlit Floriano. The commission for the series work will therefore be awarded to Charlit Floriano.

Jury Comments

The jury members applaud the efforts of all 63 artists that made submissions to the competition. There were many excellent proposals. Opening personal ideas and talents to public scrutiny can be difficult and the jury therefore extend their thanks to all the artists that shared their ideas by submitting to this competition, especially the six (6) shortlisted artists whose proposals were presented for public comment. The jury also extend their thanks to all 190 people that took the time to review the shortlisted submissions, select their preferred proposal and provide comments. There were fifteen pages of comments submitted including many excellent comments related to the project goal which helped inform their decision. The insightful comments provided were very helpful in understanding public reaction to all of the proposals and in making the difficult decision of which of the six (6) excellent proposals should be implemented.

Jury comments on each proposal are as follows:

ENCHANTED HAMILTON by Charlit Floriano
This artist’s work made a subtle impression on the jury initially but grew on them over the course of the adjudication period. There is a richness in the execution of this series of designs the jury felt would lead the public to new observations and discoveries as time passed. Two of the five designs (Health and Transportation) were not as vibrant in terms of colour palette as the others. However the jury felt Floriano’s work was the most unique of the proposals, as each design referenced the buildings and street life that surround its context in an inventive, playful and meaningful way. The jury felt this artist’s proposal responded well to competition goal and themes and had high artistic merit. This proposal also received the largest number of favourable comments from the public.

VARIATIONS ON A CONTINUUM by David Trautrimas
The jury applauded this artist’s efforts to honour and re-interpret several important architectural landmarks in the design series’ surrounding context. Trautrimas’ research and attention to detail translated to an intriguing and impressive visual narrative of Downtown Hamilton’s built environment. Members of the jury were concerned however that the series lacked the visual depth of some of the other proposals and that its subtle patterning may attract graffiti. The proposal was not highly ranked in public consultation and the jury worried the series might not continuously engage the public over time.

VIBRANT CITY by Jenn Kitagawa
The jury felt this artist’s work read very strongly as a series. It made an admirable attempt at capturing a variety of elements from the design series’ site context and did so in lively fashion. Though upbeat, the jury did remark that the colours of this proposal are not as vibrant as some of the other proposals. Members of the jury were concerned the use of symbology throughout the series was too abstract, didn’t delve deeply and therefore, was not as reflective of the competition goal and themes as the higher scoring proposals. The jury also worried there was a lot of open space throughout the series, which may prove attractive to graffiti-taggers. In terms of public consultation, this proposal was not identified by many as preferred.

THE STORIED PAST OF OUR GREAT CITY by Kayla Whitney
The jury applauded the artist’s attempt to capture a variety of local architectural landmarks, many well-known Hamilton stories and local personalities. Whitney’s use of watercolour was also refreshing, in an age where much is digitized. The jury felt however that the elements depicted seemed disconnected and didn’t respond to the design series’ locations as well as some of the other proposals. The Jury also raised there may be concerns with the use of Indigenous themes and symbols by an artist who does not identify as Indigenous. Though this work was generally well-received by the public, some members of the public identified concerns with honouring the Suffragettes’ legacy in terms of race and segregation within the movement. Overall, the jury felt the proposal was not as conceptually strong as some of the others.

UNTITLED by Kirsten McCrae
The jury loved the various textures this artist’s work offered. Jury members felt the series was vibrant and colourful and appreciated the artist’s conceptual proposal of diversity through pattern. In execution, however, jury members felt the Hamilton connection was weak and would not be obvious to passers-by. Subsequently, the jury was of the opinion this series did not adequately address the goal and themes of the competition.

URBAN JUNGLE by Natalie Very B.
The jury loved the fun and vibrant nature of this artist’s series of designs. Its fantastical elements and theme of a mythical Hamilton were well-received. The jury agreed it would be clearly recognized as a series and bring a playful energy to downtown streets. Jury members felt the series has the potential to engage a younger audience in the present but were concerned that over time, the work may become dated. The jury also had reservations the proposal didn’t reference Downtown Hamilton as strongly as some of the other proposals and therefore was not as successful in addressing the project goal and themes.

The jury

• Dr. Monolina Bhattacharyya-Ray - City of Hamilton Arts Advisory Commission
• Kerry Jarvi - Executive Director, Downtown Hamilton BIA
• Jamie Lawson - Artist/Local Resident *Absent for Final Adjudication
• Eli Nolet - Artist/Local Resident
• Brendan Wetton - Community Engagement Coordinator, Intl. Village BIA

Advisors to the Jury

• Ken Coit Manager, Placemaking, Public Art & Projects
• Zahra Awang Art in Public Places Project Specialist, Placemaking, Public Art & Projects

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met at the Lister Building on Wednesday March 29, 2017. The Jury reviewed the three short-listed artist proposals to determine which artist should be awarded the commission to provide art work to be installed by the City in the 2 new nine metre tall Gore Park beacon features. Jury members evaluated the proposals for artistic excellence, response to competition goals and context, appropriateness for the site and technical issues based on their review of the submission information and review of over 280 public comments.

Artists were asked to address the following vision and themes.

“The Gore is an urban oasis at the City’s crossroads. People gather to share their heritage, participate in leisure and entertainment, and enjoy diverse shopping and dining. It is a cultural gem and a safe, inviting and accessible public destination where people meet before moving on, or stay to interact. “Meet me at the Gore” can be heard throughout the City as people make their daily plans.”

Themes

History and Heritage
Recognize and reflect the rich and unique history of the area

Inclusiveness and Community
The work should express a sense of community, be accessible to people of all ages, recognize the pedestrian focus of the area and encourage gathering.

Award

After discussing the various aspects of the short-listed proposals and the competition requirements, the jury assigned the highest score to the proposal by artist Dave Kuruc entitled “Music City Markers”. The commission for the work will therefore be awarded to Dave Kuruc.

Jury comments

The jury noted that each of three short-listed artists provided very different but equally excellent responses to the project vision and themes. This made the selection of the winning proposal very difficult and meant that they had to work hard together and in some cases compromise their initial thoughts to arrive at a collective decision.

In the case of those artists that were not short-listed the jury recognized that for many this was the first time they had made a submission to a public art call and wanted to congratulate them on their efforts. Many proposals demonstrated a great deal of skill but their proposals did not provide as complex a response to the project vision and themes as the short-listed proposals

Dave Kuruc
The jury felt that Dave Kuruc’s proposal addressed all of the major ideas of the vision and themes for the project in a very effective but unusual way. It proposed a unique connection to the Hamilton community through the stories of its musicians. It will be a bright and colourful graphic landmark in the park recalling the posters that are part of any vibrant urban place. The work is also a type of poetry asking the viewer to contemplate the words and phrases in context of their own thoughts and that of the park setting. The jury did recognize that for those new to the English language there may be a barrier to access some aspects of the work but noted that the work was accessible on several different levels and could also work as a kind of tool to access some very interesting and meaning stories about Hamilton.

Paul Elia
The Jury noted that Paul Elia’s proposal was the best executed and expressed the unique architectural culture of the city very well. However some members of the jury noted that the selection of works presented, while very effective in showing the architecture, did not illustrate a sense of community or gathering as well as the other proposals.

Jihee Min
The Jury felt that Jihee Min’s proposal best expressed the more universal themes of the gathering and community. However they felt that the work did not have as strong a connection to Hamilton as the other proposals.

The jury

• Kerry Jarvi - Executive Director Downtown Hamilton BIA
• Tyler Cowie - Downtown Business Owner, Graphic Designer
• Alissa Denham-Robinson - Architectural Consultant, Gore Park Master Plan Public Stakeholder Committee Member, Chair- Hamilton Municipal Heritage Committee
• Ray Rivers - Arts Advisory Commission
• Laura Marotta - Artist

Advisors to the Jury

• Meghan Stewart - City of Hamilton Landscape Architect
• Ken Coit (Facilitator) - City of Hamilton Manager of Public Art and Projects, Tourism and Culture

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met on the evening of June 3rd to determine which of the six short-listed artists’ proposals for a work of public art in front of the Hamilton Farmers’ Market should be implemented. They reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, public consultation results and in response to the following competition goal: 

Goal

This Public Art project is to enhance the public space along York Boulevard in the vicinity of the Hamilton Farmers’ Market (Market) by installing a work(s) of Public Art that identify the location of the Market and express the spirit and qualities of the Hamilton Farmers’ Market to passing motorists and pedestrians.

At a recent meeting of Market and community stakeholders the following statements were developed to describe the spirit and qualities of the Market.

The Hamilton Farmers’ Market is:

• people place where visitors and stall holders interact to create a welcoming sense of community; diverse, offering a unique variety of foods, merchandise and cultural experiences; 
• a continually evolving community of innovative small businesses; 
• a Hamilton institution with a long and rich history that inspires loyalty in the community; and 
• a place where Hamiltonians are exposed to, educated about and connect with food and local agriculture. 

Award

After a long discussion about various aspects of the short-listed proposals the jury gave the highest overall score to the proposal Raising the Barn by David Hind. The commission for the work will therefore be awarded to David Hind. 

Jury comments

The jury members applauded the efforts of all of the 48 artists that made submissions to the competition. There were many excellent proposals. Opening personal ideas and talents to public scrutiny can be difficult and the jury therefore extended their thanks to all of the artists that shared their ideas by submitting to this competition, especially the six short-listed artists whose proposals were presented for public comment.

The jury also noted the large response to public consultation on this project. They extended their thanks to all 1376 people that took the time to review the short-listed submissions, select their preferred proposal and provide comments. There were over forty pages of comments submitted including a large number of excellent comments related to the project goal which helped to inform their decision.

The winning proposal was not the one selected in the overall public consultation results and media reports incorrectly implied that another proposal had won. Therefore the jury wanted to assure those that provided opinions that their input was an important part of the process and was carefully considered. They also wanted to ensure that their reasoning, as noted below, was made public. They wished to clarify that they and the artists understood from the beginning of the project that the selection of the winning proposal rested with the jury. It was clear on the project website, in the Call for Artist Documents and in media releases that the public consultation results were to be considered by the jury along with other criteria such as ongoing maintenance and artistic excellence in their determination of the winning proposal. The results of the public consultation especially the many insightful comments provided were very helpful in understanding public reaction to all of the proposals and in making the difficult decision of which one of six excellent proposals should be implemented. 

Jury comments on each proposal are as follows: 

Raising the Barn by David Hind
The jury felt this proposal best achieved the project goal. The work is highly visible and is very contemporary in design while at the same time invoking ideas of community, family farming, the source of our food and our agricultural heritage. It suits its site well by providing the large bold image of the barn to the street and passing drivers while the detailed image of a tractor surrounded by a farming family faces pedestrians on the sidewalk and is visible to shoppers in the market itself. The work is also raised allowing for maximum use of the limited sidewalk space in front of the market. Some jurors and staff noted that the image of the barn may not be as visible when approaching from James Street. Others noted that it would appear more abstract from that vantage point, which is the approach from the arts district in the city. The materials used are not typical to public art but similar works by the artist have been in place outdoors for many years. It was generally well received during public consultation especially by those who reviewed the proposals in person. Most jurors felt that this work will become a new downtown landmark “Meet me under the red barn”. This work was therefore assigned the highest overall score.

Once Upon a Time in Hamilton’s Farmers’ Market by Olenka Kleban and Oksana Hawrylak of the Kosa Kolektiv 
This proposed work is based on the Slavic story The Giant Turnip which is etched into one of four large stainless steel turnip tops to be placed along the street. The story and the idea are very compelling, beautifully executed and address themes such as community working together, family and agriculture. The idea of having a story a part of a work near the library also seemed appropriate. However the jury noted that the work depends on the viewer to read the story to fully understand the work and its relationship to the Market. They felt that the work was therefore not as accessible as other proposals that did not require reading. The jury noted that an early version of the proposal did include a piece that illustrated the story showing a family pulling up a turnip. The artists were required to reduce the scope of their proposal as to not exceed the $75000 award and decided to delete that part of their proposal. The stainless steel finish and size of the work was appropriate but may not have as much impact as other proposals to passing drivers as it is similar to the existing Market facade. Although this work was very well received in the web-based public consultation, the jury scored it slightly less than the successful proposal. 

The Carrots Don’t Get Here on Their Own by Bryce Kanbara and Brian Kelly
This proposal best illustrated the Market as a people place recalling the different types of shoppers and workers that use the Market. The jury noted that this work would also create a sense of movement along the street. The jury felt that while the work, through its use of Corten (rusting) steel and the style of the figures was bold and recalled the history of the Market, it was not as forward looking as the other proposals. The work was also not as well received as the previous two proposals in public consultation. This work was therefore scored lower. 

Seed Pods by Leslie Putnam
This proposal was very compelling to some jurors for addressing the theme of growth in a simple, beautiful and accessible work. Some jurors were uncomfortable with the scale and felt that other proposals addressed a broader range of themes more specific to the Market. The work was not as well received as other proposals in public consultation. This work was therefore scored lower. 

Goods of Weight (avoirdupois) by Ingrid Mayrhofer
The jury and members of the public complemented this proposal for being the only one that proposed a functional aspect by including bicycle racks. They felt that the use of baskets to recall many themes relating to the Market was a simple and effective response to the project goals. However, the jury felt that this work was not as ambitious as some of the other proposals. The work was also not as well received as other proposals in public consultation. This work was therefore scored lower. 

To Market by Rhonda Weppler and Trevor Mahovsky
The jury commended the artists of this proposal for their obvious talent as sculptors. This is a beautiful and detailed work that successfully addressed many aspects of the project goal. However, the jury felt that although tall the work would not have the presence on the street of the Hind proposal. The work was also not as well received as other proposals in public consultation. This work was therefore scored lower. 

The Jury

• Paul Elia - Artist 
• Sylvia Nickerson - Beasley Neighbourhood Association/Artist 
• Donna Reid - City of Hamilton Arts Advisory Commission 
• Breann Ritchie - Hamilton Arts Council/Artist 
• Jules Gauthier - Market Stall Holder 
• Chris Cutler - Friends of the Market 
• Ian Walker - Market Stall Holder Worker 

This report is an overview of the discussion of the volunteer citizen jury which met on Friday August 7th, 2020 to determine the twenty (20) shortlisted artist proposals for the Supporting Healthcare Traffic Signal Box Wraps Public Art Project.

They reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, public consultation results for the period August 20th to September 9th, 2020 and in response to the following competition goal:

Traffic signal box public art designs should be vibrant, positive works focused on public health and wellness that support and uplift our vital healthcare workers and the patients they serve in their everyday work and as we manage COVID-19.

Award

After reviewing Public Consultation results for the period August 20th to September 9th, 2020 for the shortlisted proposals, the jury confirmed the fifteen (15) artist proposals that were selected as most preferred by the public were to be awarded commissions as follows:

Jury Comments

The jury members applaud the efforts of all 92 artists that made submissions to the competition. There were many excellent proposals. Opening personal ideas and talents to public scrutiny can be difficult and the jury therefore extend their thanks to all the artists that shared their ideas by submitting to this competition, especially the twenty (20) shortlisted artists whose proposals were presented for public comment.

The jury also extend their thanks to all 970 people that took the time to review the shortlisted submissions, select their three (3) preferred proposals and provide comments. There were over twenty pages of comments submitted.

The successful artist proposals were selected because the Jury felt they excelled in conveying gratitude and optimism to our vital healthcare workers and their patients. The selected designs are vibrant and positive. A number of them recognized our diverse community’s contributions to public health and wellbeing. Some of the works provided beautiful, detailed portraits of healthcare workers, humanizing them for the public.

Many of the proposals acknowledged the heart and compassion healthcare workers bring to their daily work in serving patients. The Jury noted a number of the proposals emphasized community and the importance of working together as we move forward. All selected proposals had strong, contemporary concepts that will bring light and joy to their sites and continue to inspire.

The Jury

• Abolade 'Abby' Adeyemi - Nursing Staff / Acute Mental Health, St. Joseph's Healthcare
• Jaime Drayer - Volunteer Patient Advisor, Hamilton Health Services
• Sonali Menezes - Multidisciplinary Artist, Hamilton Arts Awards winner
• Rony Mikhael - Creative Director / Graphic Designer, Operatic
• Annette Paiement - Chair, Hamilton Arts Advisory Commission

Advisors to the Jury

• Ken Coit - Manager, Placemaking, Public Art & Projects
• Zahra Awang - Art in Public Places Project Specialist, Placemaking, Public Art & Projects

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury that met on the evening of Tuesday March 27, 2018 to determine which of the six short-listed artists’ proposals for a mural (to be installed on an exterior wall on James Street South,
across from the Hamilton GO Centre in downtown Hamilton) should be implemented. They reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, public consultation results and the proposals’ response to the following competition goal:

“That the proposed art work should be welcoming and invite a sense of arrival to Hamilton, as well as help minimize the negative effects of the railway bridge concrete structure and its dark tunnel.”

The jury also reviewed submissions for how successfully they addressed one or more of the following themes identified by local residents and business owners:

• The location as a gateway to the Durand and Corktown neighbourhoods, downtown and the city;
• The natural character of the street as a geographic connection between the Niagara Escarpment and downtown, and between the historic grade and the current street level;
• The rich architectural heritage of the neighbourhood;
• A vibrant community undergoing revitalization.

Award

After a discussing the various aspects of the short-listed proposals the jury gave the highest overall score to the proposal Gateway by Vivian Rosas & Vesna Asanovic. The commission for the work will therefore be awarded to Vivian Rosas and Vesna Asanovic.

The jury members applauded the efforts of all of the 31 artists that made submissions to the competition. There were many excellent proposals. The jury extended their thanks to all of the artists that shared their ideas by submitting to this competition, especially the six shortlisted artists whose proposals were presented for public comment.

The jury also shared their appreciation for all 547 people that took the time to review the short-listed submissions, select their preferred proposal and provide comments. There were nearly 60 pages of comments submitted which included many excellent ones related to the project goal and themes, which helped to inform the jury’s decision. Moreover, the public consultation offered important insight into public reaction to all of the proposals. While there was enthusiastic support for each of the six proposals, the prevailing preference was for Gateway. The many perceptive comments in support of this proposal influenced the jury in making their decision to award this proposal the highest score.

Jury comments on each proposal are as follows:

Gateway, Artists: Vivian Rosas & Vesna Asanovic
The jury felt that Gateway had the strongest graphic presentation – crisp, clear, and bright, most effectively addressing the goal of welcoming and minimizing the negative effects of the dark tunnel. They felt the imagery would be clearly discernable for motorists, pedestrians viewing from across the street and those passing at night. They appreciated that the artists played with the unique proportions of the mural – using large imagery in narrow sections and creating a seamless narrative flow in a well-balanced layout. The jury also commented that the energy and content of the proposal successfully reflected a changing and revitalizing multicultural neighbourhood, as well as its natural character.

Hidden Time, Artist: Alex McLeod
The jury noted that Alex McLeod’s proposal stood out as creating a unique, three dimensional world that would lend great depth to the space and bring nature to an urban area. They indicated that this proposal has great flow, and would be a beautiful addition to the street. However, the jury was concerned that the concept of Hidden Time may not translate to the viewer, that from a distance the forms may be hard to distinguish, and that the work did not portray as strong a connection to Hamilton as the other proposals.

Untitled, Artist: Coloma Art and Design
The jury appreciated the proposal by Coloma Art and Design for its urban grittiness and conceptual richness. They felt that the level of detail would draw viewers to take a closer look and make for a multidimensional experience. However, the jury felt that the concept did not appear to be fully executed in the visual proposal. They also expressed a concern that the overall dark tone of the proposal would not meet the goal of bringing lightness to the tunnel.

Excavation, Artists: Dave Kuruc with Lisa Pijuan-Nomura, Brian Kelly & Elijah Nolet
The jury felt that Excavation stood out as being most grounded in Hamilton history and iconography and commended the team for their research. They enjoyed the graphic presentation using multiple mediums and felt the imagery would be clearly visible for motorists, pedestrians viewing from across the street and those passing at night. However, the jury felt that the pre-historic imagery was dominant and that while the design did celebrate heritage in general, it did not address architectural heritage nor did it address the natural landscape or a revitalizing neighbourhood as well as some other proposals.

Timelines, Artist: Natalie Hunter
The jury found Timelines to be most conceptually rich, having the potential to connect the escarpment to city and therefore scored it very high on artistic merit. However, the jury felt that the concept wasn’t rendered to its full potential in the visual proposal, and that it lacked a diversity of imagery. They also were concerned that the sophisticated mural concept might not translate to the average passer-by.

Untitled, Artist: Vermillion Sands (Jacqui Oakley & Jamie Lawson)
The jury noted the highly skilled artistry in the bright and warm proposal by Vermillion Sands. They enjoyed the fluidity and movement in this work which featured complex patterning, united through colour. However, the jury felt the work had the effect of transporting the viewer away from Hamilton due to the palette, which makes the otherwise strong local flora and fauna motifs feel tropical. They therefore didn’t feel that this piece functioned well in inviting a sense of arrival to Hamilton.

The Jury

• Caroline Sutton* - Local Resident
• Bryce Huffman - Artist, Previous Public Art Competition winner for Cater Park Mural
• Victoria Long-Wincza - Hamilton Conservatory for the Arts
• Chris Redmond**  - President Durand Neighbourhood Association; Durand Coffee
• Irene Feddema - Local Resident – IF Graphic Design
• Sara Dickinson - Arts Advisory Commission
• Mandeep Jassal - Community Relations, Metrolinx

*Partial attendance – Stage One jury only
** Partial attendance – Stage Two jury only

Advisors to the Jury

• Ken Coit - City of Hamilton, Program Manager, Public Art & Projects (Facilitator)
• Jen Anisef - City of Hamilton, Cultural Projects Specialist, Public Art & Projects

The King William Art Walk is a joint project of the Downtown Hamilton BIA, the International Village BIA with support from the City of Hamilton and Hamilton Arts Council. The mission of King William Art Walk is to foster, create and maintain through partnership s a designated urban art trail by connecting arts and cultural activity centres in the downtown core. 

Process

The artist-designed bench call was an open call for submissions. Over 30 submissions were received. Three designs were chosen and installed along King William Street, from Walnut to Hughson Street. 

Successful proposals

The jury and the King William Art Walk committee would like to congratulate Joan Sturch, Steven Twigg and John Carter for their successful proposals. Designs were chosen based on evaluation criteria, including artistic excellence and vision, meaning and connection to the environment, feasibility and technical requirements. Jurors thought the successful proposals were creative pieces that would draw attention to the street and surrounding environment, were interactive, fun and exemplified their idea of what an Art Walk is.

Volunteer jurors

The committee would also like to thank the volunteer jurors for their time and dedication to this project. Members of the jury were, in no particular order: 

• Jeff Feswick - President, Historia Building Restoration 
• Gregg Taylor - Theatre Aquarius 
• Greg Webster - King William Street resident 
• Drew Mitchell - Downtown BIA Chairman Planning & Beautification Committee, Scotiabank.
• Anna Sponer - Artist

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met on the evening of Tuesday August 13th, 2019 to determine which of the thirty-eight (38) shortlisted artist proposals for Traffic Signal Boxes in Downtown Hamilton should be implemented. They reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, public consultation results and in response to the following competition goal:

Utility box public art in the Downtown Hamilton Community Improvement Area (DHCIPA) should be vibrant, positive and reflective of Hamilton’s downtown.

The jury also reviewed submissions for how successfully they addressed one or more of the following themes identified by artists, local residents and business owners:

• Hamilton Through the Ages
• Hamilton Stories
• Hamilton Communities / Street Life

Award

After reviewing Public Consultation results for the Traffic Signal Box shortlisted proposals, the jury selected the thirty-two (32) artist proposals with the highest number of votes by the public, that met or exceeded all passing scores as outlined under the Call for Artists’ Stage Two Selection Criteria.

They are, in order from highest to lowest number of votes, as follows:

• Olivia Putignano - YOU ARE HERE HOME
• Bethany Kenyon - PLANTS AND HANDS
• Megan Blakes - THE VIBRANT TIGER CITY
• Andrea Warnick - INDUSTRIAL PRINT SERIES
• Allison Burda & Cam Gee - COMIN’ ROUND THE MOUNTAIN
• Nick La Rocca - HAMILTON BLUES
• Alex Borghesan – SKYLINE
• Jonah Kamphorst - SKY RACER
• Brie Berry - HAMILTON HAS GONE TO THE DOGS
• Vesna Asanovic - ELECTRIC CITY
• Kayla Rulys - JAMMING IN THE HAMMER
• Cody Boucher - HAMILTON SKIES
• Ryan Ferguson – UNTITLED
• Jordan Dunlop - W(H)ERE DREAMS COME TRUE
• Daniel Kozina - UNTITLED
• Darryl Gold - HAMILTON’S LOST LEGACY OF LIGHT
• Phoebe Taylor - GOOD ROOTS GROW HERE
• Danny Custodio - FLOWER CARPETS / TAPETES FLORIDOS
• Shelley Locke - ODE TO T-CATS
• Sharifa Patrick - BREATH OF FRESH AIR
• Laura Bromwich - UNTITLED
• Vivian Rosas - PLAY ENGAGE CREATE DISCOVER
• Yasaman Mehrsa - UNTITLED
• Darian Poisson and Clear Eyes Collective - GOIN’ HAM!
• Brody Campbell - UNTITLED
• Mark Jenkyns - HAMILTON AFTER FIVE
• Andrew Osta - HAMILTON
• Chris Erskine - SCHOOL TO WORK
• Ghazeleh Rastgar - BOOKSHELF
• Darian Poisson and Clear Eyes Collective - URBAN MUSE
• Cassandra Ferguson - UNTITLED
• Elinor Brown - GROOVE CYCLIN’

Jury Comments

The jury members applaud the efforts of all 137 artists that made submissions to the competition. There were many excellent proposals. Opening personal ideas and talents to public scrutiny can be difficult and the jury therefore extend their thanks to all the artists that shared their ideas by submitting to this competition, especially the thirty-eight (38) shortlisted artists whose proposals were presented for public comment.

The jury also extend their thanks to all 1745 people that took the time to review the shortlisted submissions, select their preferred proposals and provide comments. There were over ninety pages of comments submitted including many excellent comments related to the project goal which helped inform their decision. The insightful comments provided were very helpful in understanding public reaction to all of the proposals and in making the decision of which of the thirty-eight (38) excellent proposals should be implemented.

The Jury

• Dr. Monolina Bhattacharyya-Ray City of Hamilton Arts Advisory Commission
• Kerry Jarvi Executive Director, Downtown Hamilton BIA
• Jamie Lawson Artist/Local Resident *Absent for Final Adjudication
• Eli Nolet Artist/Local Resident
• Brendan Wetton Community Engagement Coordinator, Intl. Village BIA

Advisors to the Jury:

• Ken Coit Manager, Placemaking, Public Art & Projects
• Zahra Awang Art in Public Places Project Specialist,
• Placemaking, Public Art & Projects

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury which met at the Lister Building on Tuesday, October 13, 2015. The Jury reviewed the six short-listed artist proposals to determine which artist should be awarded the commission for an installation in the public plaza at the new West Harbour GO Station on James Street North. Jury members evaluated the proposals for artistic merit, response to competition goals and themes, appropriateness for the site and technical feasibility based on their review of the submission information, interviews with the artists and review of over 450 public comments.

Artists were asked to address the following goal and themes.

Goal: Public art at the GO station plaza should be evocative and engage the public imagination, convey a positive message, evoke civic pride, and help animate the plaza.

Themes: The work should consider the rich cultural, physical and historical context of the area and address one or more of the following themes:

• Migration and mobility
• The cultural diversity of immigration to the city
• Connections: physical, visual or implied between modes of transportation, communities, landmarks, the past and present
• The natural and cultural features of the site and its surroundings
• Award

After discussing the various aspects of the short-listed proposals and the competition requirements, the jury assigned the highest score to Bead Maze by Laura Marotta. The commission for the work will therefore be awarded to Laura Marotta.

Jury Comments

The James Street North GO Station Jury recognized the efforts of all of the artists that made submissions to the competition, particularly the six short-listed artists. All of the proposals were well considered responses to the competition and that made it a very difficult decision for the Jury. The Jury wishes to congratulate each of the six finalists on their efforts.

Laura Marotta
The jury felt that Marotta had a conceptually strong proposal that met the competition themes of migration, mobility and connections between modes of transportation because the Bead Maze recalls the intersecting lines and movement of a regional transit system. The fact that the piece brings to mind the bead maze toy common in pre-school playrooms was seen very positively by some jurors who thought this makes the artwork relatable to people of all ages; reinforces the plaza as a welcoming gateway; and highlights that the North End is valued as a child and family-friendly neighbourhood. This proposal was well received by the public who liked that it was colourful, playful and positively echoed the current revitalization of James Street North. The work therefore scored very well on Artistic Excellence and Response to Competition Goals.

The remaining Jury comments are listed alphabetically by order of the artist’s last name or artist collective name.

William Frymire
The Jury agreed that this work fulfilled the goal and themes of the competition as it spoke to Hamilton’s rich diversity and cultural imprint. The work spoke to the continual growth of Hamilton by means of people migration and immigration. The Jury was also impressed by the community engagement and environmental stewardship elements of the work (e.g. incorporating images of local residents, marble collection drive, use of recycled materials). They felt these elements would increase Hamiltonian’s sense of ownership of the work and decrease the likelihood of graffiti and other forms of vandalism. The Jury was challenged by the scale of the work. They commented it created a “wall” (30 feet in length, 10 feet in height) that could cut the physical space of the plaza in half. In addition, some jurors were concerned that the ratio of marbles to aluminum was low and that, upon execution, the artwork may not resonate as a face. For these reasons the work was scored lower by the Jury.

Vesna Jocic
The Jury found that Jocic’s work, as a timeline that spoke to the past, present and future of the site, was both accessible and interactive. It scored well on Technical Feasibility. Concerns were raised by the Jury that the proposal did not include the complete timeline text which was seen by all jurors as a critical component in judging the impact of the work. Some jurors felt that the work was overly diagrammatic, explaining rather than representing the competition themes. The work was not as well received as others in public consultation.

Solidoperations Inc.
The Jury was impressed by Solidoperations attractive and organic sculpture design. They liked the monumental scale; that the work was dynamic because the perceived shape would change as a person approached it or walked around it; and that the suggested location allowed for free flow of pedestrian traffic. However, jurors felt that the work did not address the competition themes as well as the other proposals. The proposal was not as well received as others in public consultation. For these reasons the work was scored lower by the Jury.

TH&B
The Jury agreed that TH&B’s work successfully addressed the goal and themes of the competition. They commented that, as an expression of a gateway to Hamilton and transportation in the region, the work made a succinct statement. The Great Lakes are not just bodies of water but are a fundamental transportation route. The steel frame construction with its industrial age look was seen by some jurors as a tribute to Hamilton’s history as a steel town and to others as a work lacking innovation. The jury had concerns that the work may not be as accessible to those walking through the plaza as some of the other works due to its height and that it may not be as impactful due to the number of other vertical elements such as light poles and trees on the site. Although this work was well received in the web-based public consultation, the Jury scored it slightly less than the successful proposal.

Brandon Vickerd
The Jury agreed that Vickerd’s piece was artistically excellent and, being made from bronze, was durable, and would be easy for the City of Hamilton to maintain. They liked the pedestrian scale of the work. However, some jurors found the work disturbing and noted that members of the public may not see the work as welcoming or reflective of their neighbourhood. Some jurors felt that it did not fulfil the goal and themes requirement as strongly as the other short-listed works. The proposal was also not as well received as others in public consultation. The work was therefore scored lower.

The Jury

• Melissa Bennett - Curator of Contemporary Art, Art Gallery of Hamilton/ Resident
• Dave Gruggen - Local Business Owner
• Elana Horowitz - Manager of Hub and Station Planning, Metrolinx
• Helen Kirkpatrick - Central Neighbourhood Association Board Member/ Resident
• Tim Potocic - Local Business Owner, Sonic Unyon Records/Supercrawl
• Josefa Radman - City of Hamilton Arts Advisory Commission/ Factory Media Centre
• Stephanie Vegh - Executive Director, Hamilton Arts Council/ Resident

Advisors to the Jury:

• Therese Charbonneau - City of Hamilton Conservator, Tourism and Culture
• Randall Dreise - Senior Project Officer at Metrolinx/ GO Transit
• Ken Coit (Facilitator) - City of Hamilton Manager of Public Art and Projects, Tourism and Culture

This report is an overview of the discussion and decision of the volunteer citizen jury that met on the evening of Tuesday March 3, 2020 to determine which of the five short-listed artists’ proposals for a permanent public art work(s) for Waterdown Memorial Park should be implemented. They reviewed the submissions in terms of technical issues, artistic excellence, response to context, public consultation results and the proposals’ response to the following competition goal:

“That the proposed art work(s) enhance and reflect the atmosphere of the park as Waterdown’s “Public Backyard” through an artwork that recognizes the park as a community gathering place and responds to its’ historical and physical context in a way that is playful and interactive.”

Staff provided an overview of the public consultation results remarking on a slightly higher than usual negative response. They noted that Waterdown is experiencing a large amount of growth and that this may have resulted in residents reacting to larger issues about the changes in the community. They also noted a number of comments that specifically spoke to the park losing green space, having too many new features and multiple service issues in the park (e.g. lighting issues and misinformation about the lack of a spray pad).

Jury Comments

The jury had a long and difficult discussion of the various aspects of the short-listed proposals. They acknowledge and appreciate positive aspects in each proposal. They find the work “Soundscapes” by Passage Studio to be playful and interactive – an assessment also reflected in public comments. However in light of public concern (identified through consultation) about limited space in the park, the jury is concerned about the fact that implementation of this proposal would require a significantly large area of the park. Moreover the jury feels that the proposal does not reflect the historical context of the park in a meaningful way. Finally, there are some technical concerns around maintenance and accessibility for this work.

The work “Light/Swing” was withdrawn by artist Brandon Vickerd due to his success in another call before the jury meeting. “Together” by James Cameron Smith and “Weathervane” by Studio Huizenga are playful works creating gathering and focal places in the park but do not address the historical context of the park. “The Outdoor Room” by Slipper Liu Studio suggests a playful and innovate way to illustrate the historical context of the park but the jury has concerns with the proposed imagery. In addition, these last three proposals were not well received in public consultation. In light of the concerns outlined above, the jury concludes that none of the proposals adequately addresses current community priorities and the context of the park. The jury therefore recommends that the project not proceed.

The jury members share the disappointment of the artists and members of the public who contributed to and supported this project. They specifically extend their thanks to the grade 4 classes at Greenleaf School and to the artists who participated in this call.

They further recommend that if a public art project is to be undertaken for Waterdown Memorial Park in future, a more fulsome analysis of the capacity and future community needs for the park should be undertaken though the development of a Park Master Plan or other similar guiding document in consultation with the community.

Moreover they recommend that, as per the focus group consultation undertaken at the outset of this project, a plaque outlining the heritage context of the park be installed.

Tourism and Culture staff is in agreement with the jury’s conclusions and recommend that the
contract not be awarded.

Public art for Waterdown will be revisited as part of an update to the Public Art Master plan in 2022-23.