Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Art topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission delays decision on large mural at Journal Sentinel complex amid masonry and legal concerns
Summary
The commission voted to hold a certificate‑of‑appropriateness decision for a large mural on the Journal Sentinel complex after staff and commissioners raised technical concerns about adhesive removability, potential masonry damage and Visual Artists Rights Act implications; the project team will provide additional product and installation details before the next meeting.
The Historic Preservation Commission voted to hold a decision on a proposed large mural on the south wall of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel complex after an extended discussion about installation method, masonry impact and artists’ removal rights.
The proposal presented by Seeds Health would attach mural cloth panels to the painted common wall above a business. Staff raised concerns that the adhesive manufacturer’s data sheet indicates removal would require pressure washing and cautioned that aggressive pressure washing can damage masonry; the city attorney’s office has provided a memo on the Visual Artists Rights Act, staff said.
Matt Kravanick, facilities director for Seeds Health, said the manufacturer’s product data indicates a water‑based latex adhesive (a Benjamin Moore product) and supplied a material data sheet for staff review. The project’s artist, Tia Richardson (business name Cosmic Butterfly), prefers fabric panels for this installation, the applicant said.
Commissioners questioned long‑term maintenance and whether fabric adhered directly to painted masonry truly provides the removability protections intended by federal visual‑artist ownership laws. One commissioner noted that if the fabric must be removed by pressure washing, that technique risks masonry damage and may conflict with city guidance on historic masonry maintenance.
Tim (staff) recommended the commission ask for more evidence that the adhesive is removable without masonry harm or to require a mechanical installation method (for example metal frames or bolted panels). Commissioners requested the applicant provide evidence of prior installations using the same method (location and removal history), manufacturer guidance on safe removal, and the legal memo on artists’ rights; the applicant agreed to supply the information to staff before the next meeting.
The commission then voted to hold the item to the next month so that staff and commissioners could review the additional technical and legal materials.
Next steps
The project team will provide documentation of adhesive properties, examples of similar installations and material safety/removal guidance; staff will circulate a city attorney memo on the Visual Artists Rights Act for commissioner review.
