Commission passes off Target warehouse paint scheme as public art
Public art? The Target warehouse expansion will include two walls painted with four colors described as "stonewash," "putty tan," "natural suede," and "good earth" in random rectangles. Aerial views of the surrounding farm land are shown below.
From the Woodland Record:
On February 17, the City of Woodland Planning Commission, unanimously approved the "Target Regional Distribution Facility Expansion - Site Plan, Design Review, including Public Art, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration." The project is a 362,099 sq. ft. expansion of the existing 1,509,591 sq. ft. warehouse located at 2050 East Beamer Street at the most northern and eastern corner of the city's industrial area.
City planners require developers to include so-called "public art" on their project sites based on an incomprehensive paragraph tucked away within design guidelines. The public art "requirement" has no framework by which educated critics (or peers of professional public artists) can review the work according to a standard process. The following is the artist's statement made by an unknown public artist - a testament to the city's mockery of public art:
"Humankind's influence upon the natural world has been profound, but ultimately, our ability to control natural systems is limited and in the case of major natural events (tornado, earthquake, etc.), nonexistent. Our influence upon nature can be extremely destructive or, when exercised thoughtfully, benign. We can impose our idea of order on the earth and, as in our agriculture, derive great benefit. But if we fail to respect the natural balance we risk harm, both to the land and to ourselves."
Read more at WoodlandRecord.com.
Posts
4 comments:
I do not understand this Target Warehouse expansion location choice. The Target Warehouse was one of the pivotal properties in the arguments used to justify the Flood Wall because it is in the area of deep flooding. Gary Wagener from the City of Woodland even admitted that the City should never have allowed this warehouse to be located and built in the deep area of flooding in Woodland. Said they could not get flood insurance, so that is why we needed to build a wall.
So how can we justify making the footprint larger for this site location? There is plenty of land outside the flood plain and locations for a warehouse that wont block flood flows if a flood should happen.
Wonder what FEMA thinks about this idea.
Brenda Cedarblade
I guess if Target wants to pay for the insurance, they might as will let them. I don't see how the added space to their existing facility will substantially alter the flood flow.
The Army Corps of Engineers messed up the flood flow when they built up the levee for the Cache Creek Settling Basin. Funny how they didn't need an EIR to do that - and they didn't let the public know what they were doing - and in doing so they altered flood flow so more Woodland properties became part of the flood zone.
The flood wall proposal was one of the many jokes this city has tried to pull.
Everything built in the flood plain causes the flood elevation to raise on surrounding property and then more people have to pay flood insurance.
So what will be the increase in flood insurance due to Target's expansion?
Post a Comment