Waukesha public art committee selects Nate Page for Site 3, approves Hannah Tuis pending painted‑background sample

The Waukesha City Public Art Committee voted to select artist Nate Page for a single mural location (Site 3) in Friedman Alley and approved commissioning artist Hannah Tuis for Sites 1 and 2 conditional on the artist providing a sample rendering showing a painted background that matches the building.

Committee members said the decisions will guide next steps: staff will contact property owners for permission, request renderings or background samples from the selected artists, and prepare contracts to schedule work this fall or as weather permits. Maria (staff member) told the committee that owner approval and contracting remain required steps before installation.

The committee narrowed a field of 21 applicants to five highly rated proposals for the RFP sites. Members praised a range of designs: James Veronese’s conceptual site work, a colorful fox design by Tuis, a moth motif that some members liked for longer horizontal walls, Jenna Brownlee’s floral work, and Veil Arden’s butterfly/guitar pieces. After discussion, members moved to approve Page for Site 3. A member said the Page design — a historic window motif on an aluminum panel — “fits really well in that spot” and several members agreed it would be visible to pedestrians. The committee then voted to advance Tuis for Sites 1 and 2 with the condition that she provide a mock‑up showing a painted background matching the building, rather than leaving the surrounding wall “grungy.”

Committee members discussed technical and site constraints. The Site 3 panel will be mounted on aluminum rather than painted directly on historic material, and members noted that a signpost and a pillar partially obstruct sight lines for some locations. Several members suggested certain designs (for example, the conceptual work by Veronese) might be better suited to longer walls or city‑owned ramps where viewers can approach from a distance. Maria noted there are also utility cabinets and other obstructions in some spots; the feasibility of placing painted cabinets or display panels at Thomas Press and other sites is still unresolved.

Cost and funding were discussed but no specific contract amounts were disclosed. One committee member commented that the Page proposal represented “a lot of money,” and the committee confirmed it has a mix of funding sources available — including Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and capital improvement project (CIP) funds — but did not identify a firm final budget for each mural. Members agreed staff should proceed with the top choices and return renderings and contract details for committee review if costs or owner approvals require changes.

The committee also resolved to keep a pool of other strong applicants for future or alternate sites, rather than issuing a new RFP. Members discussed potential future locations — including a long rectangular wall, a parking ramp, and a city‑owned North Street ramp — and asked staff to contact artists not selected to see whether they would adapt proposals for alternate spots.

Direct quotes from the meeting include a public commenter during the comment period: “I love the art that changes out in in the hallway, and I love the diversity of it.” Maria (staff member) summarized next steps: “we can work on the contract and, go through that.” When members raised the cost, one member said of the Page design, “it is a lot of money.”

Next steps: staff will (1) contact property owners to confirm permission for work on their buildings, (2) ask the selected artists for renderings or a painted‑background mock‑up as requested by the committee, (3) draft contracts and schedule work subject to weather and owner approval, and (4) return to the committee if contracts, budgets, or site feasibility require further decisions. The committee said it expects to discuss progress at its next regular meeting, tentatively scheduled for October 7.