Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsThursday, May 28, 2009
City Asphalt Alchemy: Converting Streets into Parks
Posted by Dominic Holden on Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:29 PM
The city is considering a new plan for parks: Rather than purchasing expensive private parcels of land, some of which remain as parking lots for years without funding to complete parks, the city would save money by converting streets, which the city already owns. Tonight, the parks department’s board of commissioners will hear a plan to tear up five blocks of Bell Street, between First and Fifth Avenues, whittling traffic down to one lane, and replacing the other lanes with lawns, trees, shrubs, and the like. Here’s a cross section:
And here’s a pigeon’s-eye view:
The project would create about 17,000 square feet of green space, says Donald Harris, the parks department’s Property and Acquisition Services Manager. "Given the high cost of land in the downtown area, more creative ways of providing park space need to be found, particularly taking advantage of already owned City infrastructure," he wrote in a letter to the parks board of commissioners on May 20. Recent purchases of private land for parks, he notes, have cost the city from $300 to $350 per square foot. By that metric, a project of this size on a city street would save about $5 million in land costs. The city would also realize savings by coinciding park construction with work by Seattle City Light, which needs to replace electrical utilities on Bell Street, and by partnering with developers, who were planning to spend money on street improvements on Bell Street anyway. The project would cost about $2.5 million, funded by last November’s pro-parks levy.
Here's how Bell Street looks now:
Harris will present his ideas to the city council’s parks committee tomorrow morning; he hopes the public can begin shaping the design of the project by July.
"Hopefully this is the first of several park boulevards downtown, providing linkages to the waterfront, downtown, and South Lake Union," Harris says. He says that some community groups have already begin clamoring for a park in their neighborhoods, including in the Pike-Pine corridor downtown.
And Gary Johnson, a planner for the Department of Planning and Development, says that there has been interest in a similar park in Ballard. "We are interested in making this happen on a much broader scale," he says.
1
This is a great first step and creates opportunities for neighborhood parks around the city. Thanks for reporting.
2
Unless they promote cafes that could use some of the park space for seating it would simply become more space for addicts and other assorted bums, just what Belltown needs.
Parks aren't the remedy for Belltown. As long as Belltown persists as a community where people drive in and out and otherwise pretty much stay at home, it's doomed to be a haven for drugs and bums. The problem with Belltown is Belltown, not a lack of park space.
Parks aren't the remedy for Belltown. As long as Belltown persists as a community where people drive in and out and otherwise pretty much stay at home, it's doomed to be a haven for drugs and bums. The problem with Belltown is Belltown, not a lack of park space.
5
This is fantastic on many levels. Its great to see our City government breaking out of their silos to work together on a project that will create a useful public space at a minimal cost. its also great to see one of our most park deprived neighborhoods get more open space. Excellent stuff all around, kudos to the folks behind this project for thinking outside the box.
6
I like it. I can only imagine the whining they're going to hear over removing a lane.
@2 - If you tore up every park in Belltown, dealers and junkies would be standing on the corner, on the sidewalk. They wouldn't disappear. I like your idea of promoting sidewalk cafes though, the city just began a very similar endeavor:
http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/03/25/17t…
@2 - If you tore up every park in Belltown, dealers and junkies would be standing on the corner, on the sidewalk. They wouldn't disappear. I like your idea of promoting sidewalk cafes though, the city just began a very similar endeavor:
http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/03/25/17t…
7
This kinds of areas become space - but - never parks.
You are in the middle of the street, never more. Sorry, has been tried all over the world and does not create parks as we use the term. And depending on the concept, space that is really hard to use.
Bogus crap, and still costs 2.5 MILLION - shit - how this city can spend money.
You are in the middle of the street, never more. Sorry, has been tried all over the world and does not create parks as we use the term. And depending on the concept, space that is really hard to use.
Bogus crap, and still costs 2.5 MILLION - shit - how this city can spend money.
10
Oh, my fucking god.
Yeah, this is a great way to create a vibrant city, by destroying the street grid, killing off four blocks of small business, and rendering part of the vibrant core into a dead zone.
The city should be in the business of BRINGING STREETS TO LIFE, NOT KILLING THEM.
This discredited garbage idea -- the very ANTITHESIS OF URBANISM -- needs to die, hard.
Yeah, this is a great way to create a vibrant city, by destroying the street grid, killing off four blocks of small business, and rendering part of the vibrant core into a dead zone.
The city should be in the business of BRINGING STREETS TO LIFE, NOT KILLING THEM.
This discredited garbage idea -- the very ANTITHESIS OF URBANISM -- needs to die, hard.
11
THIS IS A FUCKING BRILLIANT IDEA! I assume buses would still run down (and stop along) this stretch of road...
12
You could just turn them into pedestrian streets with greenspace instead, and they'd be way more parklike.
With a sharrows area for cyclists (not motorbikes) to use.
That would be far more parklike.
With a sharrows area for cyclists (not motorbikes) to use.
That would be far more parklike.
13
Awesome. I worked just blocks from there for about four years. There are very few businesses on that stretch of Bell. Mostly it is apartment buildings, empty lots, parking lots or blank walls. It's already a one-way street going East-West. There will still be a lane for traffic and a lane for parking. It's actually the ideal street to try something like this. So far the best thing that has ever happened to that street is the dog park. Anything they can do to bring more pedestrians and residents outside is great. It's not going to solve Belltown's problems, nor is it intended to. But it's a great idea to try and make something out of the dead zone that is, and has been for decades, Bell.
14
@3 thanks for your sarcasm. The fact is that Belltown has extremely diverse (fiscally and otherwise) population. I'm a native Seattleite and I live there on a modest income because I like being close to work and in an urban center. The anti-Belltown condo thing is over. We're turning over a new leaf with the new Community Council.
#10 wrong. Cars driving by don't aid in business, but sidewalk cafes, people comfortably stolling by and then stopping into a store or restaurant, do. This is urbanism at its best. Unless, you're being sarcastic? Can't tell.
@11 Bell Street is pretty quiet for buses. Some use it for turnarounds but no actual stops. Worry not.
Hooray! We upzoned Denny Regrade and left it to fester. Now this is exactly the kind of work we should be putting into a very busy, and very deserving neighborhood.
#10 wrong. Cars driving by don't aid in business, but sidewalk cafes, people comfortably stolling by and then stopping into a store or restaurant, do. This is urbanism at its best. Unless, you're being sarcastic? Can't tell.
@11 Bell Street is pretty quiet for buses. Some use it for turnarounds but no actual stops. Worry not.
Hooray! We upzoned Denny Regrade and left it to fester. Now this is exactly the kind of work we should be putting into a very busy, and very deserving neighborhood.
15
Fnarf-
Let me guess you live in a large house on a quiet street in single family housing land? They probably don't even have permit parking where you live but, that doesn't stop you from making proclamations about "urbanism".
Pedestrian acceented streets have been demonstrated successfully worldwide from Paris to Osaka.
I am glad to hear this idea finally getting some traction. The Belltown Green Streets idea was part of the Neighborhood Plan over a decade ago. If you look at Vine St between Elliot and 1st you'll see that it can be done well and is not the end of world when a couple of dozen parking spaces are traded for open space.
So Fnarf it is your turn to sit down and shut up.
Let me guess you live in a large house on a quiet street in single family housing land? They probably don't even have permit parking where you live but, that doesn't stop you from making proclamations about "urbanism".
Pedestrian acceented streets have been demonstrated successfully worldwide from Paris to Osaka.
I am glad to hear this idea finally getting some traction. The Belltown Green Streets idea was part of the Neighborhood Plan over a decade ago. If you look at Vine St between Elliot and 1st you'll see that it can be done well and is not the end of world when a couple of dozen parking spaces are traded for open space.
So Fnarf it is your turn to sit down and shut up.
16
Zander, if you would like pointers to the voluminous literature on the grotesque failure of the "pedestrianized street" idea, I can provide them. This isn't a new idea; it's been tried HUNDREDS OF TIMES since the seventies, and most of them have been reverted to ordinary streets. Believe it or not, I know what I'm talking about; I've been reading the literature on this subject for thirty years. I've forgotten more about urbanism in the last thirty minutes than you will ever know in your lifetime.
Cars driving by do, very much, help local business. They can see them, for one thing; and park in front of them, and get out and shop in them. The kinds of cutesy watercolors you see here are deliberate distortions. Streets are the lifeblood of a city, for cars, transit, and people; parks, for the most part, are not. Pedestrianized streets, DEFINITELY not. Cafes? You're dreaming; they'll die here.
Cars driving by do, very much, help local business. They can see them, for one thing; and park in front of them, and get out and shop in them. The kinds of cutesy watercolors you see here are deliberate distortions. Streets are the lifeblood of a city, for cars, transit, and people; parks, for the most part, are not. Pedestrianized streets, DEFINITELY not. Cafes? You're dreaming; they'll die here.
17
half measures like this don't really alleviate the need for green space in this pitifully under-parked city. the failure of the Commons initiative remains a tragedy for Seattle.
that block of nothing where the public safety building once was? THE CITY ALREADY OWNS THAT AND IT COULD BE A SPACE NAMED, i dunno, CITY HALL SQUARE, in about 2 years. the crack bums and schizos sure would like a new green space to fill.
that block of nothing where the public safety building once was? THE CITY ALREADY OWNS THAT AND IT COULD BE A SPACE NAMED, i dunno, CITY HALL SQUARE, in about 2 years. the crack bums and schizos sure would like a new green space to fill.
18
A sea of sidewalk cafes in the driving rain - you people are silly romantics
And dog poop everywhere, the real use of parks in this day and age - shitting dogs
Of course a heard of milk goats fenced and fed right there might be keen.... the ladies of the street come to milk the goats twice a day ... of course ... with nothing better to do .... feed the goats on food and yard waste ... oops no yard waste.
then, there is the growing of medical marijuana - must be done somewhere - and all those horrible giant planters never maintained or watered past the first year
interesting that selling over priced coffee and over priced snacks is the solution to every Seattle land use problem ...
perhaps a Starbucks flu struck some time ago and changed thought patterns for ever
and all the police will be needed to keep the street people and just the people who look too tired and too shabby from parking their asses in this new urban park - you must control those people ... or the yuppies will stay away ... and we all know the doom that means
shit
2.5 million, it is not real money anyway
And dog poop everywhere, the real use of parks in this day and age - shitting dogs
Of course a heard of milk goats fenced and fed right there might be keen.... the ladies of the street come to milk the goats twice a day ... of course ... with nothing better to do .... feed the goats on food and yard waste ... oops no yard waste.
then, there is the growing of medical marijuana - must be done somewhere - and all those horrible giant planters never maintained or watered past the first year
interesting that selling over priced coffee and over priced snacks is the solution to every Seattle land use problem ...
perhaps a Starbucks flu struck some time ago and changed thought patterns for ever
and all the police will be needed to keep the street people and just the people who look too tired and too shabby from parking their asses in this new urban park - you must control those people ... or the yuppies will stay away ... and we all know the doom that means
shit
2.5 million, it is not real money anyway
19
oh, and fnarf @ 17 is dead-on. occidental park is a fucking disaster BECAUSE occidental is closed to traffic (not that i can convince the planner who perpetrated the idea of that). an ice rink won't fix that shit, opening occidental to cars from jackson to yesler would. look what re-opening pine to traffic through westlake did. it was good.
plus something finally needs to be built on the half block to the east of occidental.
plus something finally needs to be built on the half block to the east of occidental.
20
FNARF hits the nail on the head.
And this proposed dumbass half measure is, what, about 1/3 of a mile from Myrtle Edwards Park?
And this proposed dumbass half measure is, what, about 1/3 of a mile from Myrtle Edwards Park?
21
Fnarf-
Maybe we should wait another 30 minutes so you can forget more of what you have "learned" about urbanism. According to your theory Bell St should be succesful because it has a few parking spaces. The still empty Speakeasy site argues aganist that. The Cities of europe are increasingly restricting vehicle access to their centers. They can't agree on a constitution but they do agree on that.
Cities do not have to be built for cars. They can be built for people.
Maybe you should get some fresh air in your backyard and think about stuff.
Maybe we should wait another 30 minutes so you can forget more of what you have "learned" about urbanism. According to your theory Bell St should be succesful because it has a few parking spaces. The still empty Speakeasy site argues aganist that. The Cities of europe are increasingly restricting vehicle access to their centers. They can't agree on a constitution but they do agree on that.
Cities do not have to be built for cars. They can be built for people.
Maybe you should get some fresh air in your backyard and think about stuff.
22
Fnarf, have you been to Belltown.. ever? There are dozens of sidewalk cafes there that turn a great profit. I think you're speculative and misinformed. And.. jaded?
24
Here's another, similar project that's been very successful:
http://www.sfgov.org/site/sfdpw_page.asp…
The sum of the differences between Seattle and SF are more than accounted for by the scope of this project (see: we lost a chunk of freeway for this... and it worked).
http://www.sfgov.org/site/sfdpw_page.asp…
The sum of the differences between Seattle and SF are more than accounted for by the scope of this project (see: we lost a chunk of freeway for this... and it worked).
26
Wow! You mean we could have something as vibrant and exciting as Nicolett Mall in Minneapolis? Or even the Woodward Mall in downtown Detroit?
27
I agree that turning streets to pure pedestrian plazas rarely works out as well as its proponents hope, but bigger sidewalks and single lanes here and there seem like a different story. But a good test place would be corridors with enough businesses to sustain them, not a fairly industrial stretch of Bell.
28
You know, we're missing some important feedback here.
What do our landowners Paul Allen and Bill Gates think?
Cause the city doesn't care what we taxpaying citizens think.
What do our landowners Paul Allen and Bill Gates think?
Cause the city doesn't care what we taxpaying citizens think.
29
It's heartening to see that the City of Seattle is providing amenities for local crack dealing entrepeneurs.
30
I've seen this done before. It always kills any business's on the street in question. And Bell? Between 1st & 5th? That's crack head central! Wow. Amazingly bad judgment!
31
Fnarf is generally right about this sort of thing but I think he's wrong in this case. This isn't a park in the sense of the Le Corbusier-style towers in a park Will-in-Seattle utopian vision that kills cities dead. It's really just a much broader sidewalk. There's the same amount of on-street parking as before and there's still a lane of traffic, so it's not going to kill the businesses there by preventing people from seeing them.
You wouldn't want to do this on every street and certainly not on a north-south arterial, but for a secondary street within a neighborhood it's an elegant way to add a pedestrian amenity that connects places people want to go without killing urban liveliness.
You wouldn't want to do this on every street and certainly not on a north-south arterial, but for a secondary street within a neighborhood it's an elegant way to add a pedestrian amenity that connects places people want to go without killing urban liveliness.
32
I live a block from there and I think it is a great idea.
New urbanism (IMHO) is about getting *people* (not cars) on the street, getting them to interact, to exist in comfortable spaces outside of the home. There are popular sidewalk cafes all along first and they do just fine. Bring the same to Bell would be a major win, especially in the context of removing the viaduct and creating a green/public space to connect to the waterfront and Myrtle Edwards.
New urbanism (IMHO) is about getting *people* (not cars) on the street, getting them to interact, to exist in comfortable spaces outside of the home. There are popular sidewalk cafes all along first and they do just fine. Bring the same to Bell would be a major win, especially in the context of removing the viaduct and creating a green/public space to connect to the waterfront and Myrtle Edwards.
33
Zander, I know that it floats your boat to repeat inanities like "cities don't have to be built for cars", or to natter on about "The Cities of europe", which is a fun generalization when you have no idea which cities or how they're laid out or what works or doesn't work in them, or why.
If you seriously believe that the proposal for Bell Street in any way resembles Europe, you're drunk.
But Seattle doesn't need airy generalities. There is no pie in the sky. Is there a single person in this city who knows what it takes to design an area where sidewalk cafes can thrive? Apparently not. Katheyef, you're right -- we've got some. They were "designed" a century ago. Now tell me, how many of them are located on strips even remotely like the proposed Bell St. park? Did they rip out the traffic lanes and parking? No? Second Avenue still has cars and parking? But...how can that be?
Dougsf, please keep your Californian dead zones out of our city. Octavia Boulevard is a lifeless horror. Cafes? I don't see any cafes. What I see is an immensely wide lawn separating neighborhoods, blocking them from connecting to each other. Fucking hideous. Such a wasted opportunity to put something there.
If the city wanted to do something useful to help Bell Street, they'd mandate the opening of fifty street food carts, and put the money there (see Dominic's article in this week's paper). The attraction draws the kind of scene you want, not the other way around. They should put a fucking factory there.
Occidental is a fantastic example of what NOT to do. God, this city has a brain disease.
If you seriously believe that the proposal for Bell Street in any way resembles Europe, you're drunk.
But Seattle doesn't need airy generalities. There is no pie in the sky. Is there a single person in this city who knows what it takes to design an area where sidewalk cafes can thrive? Apparently not. Katheyef, you're right -- we've got some. They were "designed" a century ago. Now tell me, how many of them are located on strips even remotely like the proposed Bell St. park? Did they rip out the traffic lanes and parking? No? Second Avenue still has cars and parking? But...how can that be?
Dougsf, please keep your Californian dead zones out of our city. Octavia Boulevard is a lifeless horror. Cafes? I don't see any cafes. What I see is an immensely wide lawn separating neighborhoods, blocking them from connecting to each other. Fucking hideous. Such a wasted opportunity to put something there.
If the city wanted to do something useful to help Bell Street, they'd mandate the opening of fifty street food carts, and put the money there (see Dominic's article in this week's paper). The attraction draws the kind of scene you want, not the other way around. They should put a fucking factory there.
Occidental is a fantastic example of what NOT to do. God, this city has a brain disease.
34
Yes, Seattle has a delusion that parks create vibrancy with throngs of people.
But Fnarf what are you specific ideas?
mandating food carts -- what? govt. owned food carts?
"putting the money there" -- huh?
What would you recommend to create the kind of st. life desired?
Yes, Seattle has a delusion that parks create vibrancy with throngs of people.
But Fnarf what are you specific ideas?
mandating food carts -- what? govt. owned food carts?
"putting the money there" -- huh?
What would you recommend to create the kind of st. life desired?
35
Here's more for you "Europe" fetishists (whatever "Europe" is supposed to mean): Europeans don't know dick about urban design.
Whoa, what?! What about Florence, Siena, Rome, I hear you cry. That romantic Rue in Paris where we kissed in the springtime? Well, guess what? The guys who designed Siena died two thousand years ago. Have you had a look at the kind of cities Europeans design nowadays? Not Paris, but Donetsk, the ring roads around Turin, the rebuilt parts of Liverpool and Rotterdam and Cologne. The list is endless, and the urban effect is devastatingly horrible.
Exactly zero percent of the charm of historical centers of European museum cities -- for that is what they are -- is attributable to modern town-planner ideas like woonerfs. And if you want to duplicate the effect here, you will have to do a lot more than put a couple of bollards up; you'll have to bulldoze the city first.
Whoa, what?! What about Florence, Siena, Rome, I hear you cry. That romantic Rue in Paris where we kissed in the springtime? Well, guess what? The guys who designed Siena died two thousand years ago. Have you had a look at the kind of cities Europeans design nowadays? Not Paris, but Donetsk, the ring roads around Turin, the rebuilt parts of Liverpool and Rotterdam and Cologne. The list is endless, and the urban effect is devastatingly horrible.
Exactly zero percent of the charm of historical centers of European museum cities -- for that is what they are -- is attributable to modern town-planner ideas like woonerfs. And if you want to duplicate the effect here, you will have to do a lot more than put a couple of bollards up; you'll have to bulldoze the city first.
36
Fnarf-
I thought platitudes would be the most effective way of communicating with you. Considering you want to landmark parking lots instead of adding more bike paths I can't have been to far off the mark.
As long as we are cherry picking examples I'll take Seattle Center as an example of a revised Street Grid.
Alas, I am not drunk presently. Would that help to even the dialog?
I thought platitudes would be the most effective way of communicating with you. Considering you want to landmark parking lots instead of adding more bike paths I can't have been to far off the mark.
As long as we are cherry picking examples I'll take Seattle Center as an example of a revised Street Grid.
Alas, I am not drunk presently. Would that help to even the dialog?
37
Most of the charm of the pedestrian-only areas of European cities is the Chinese restaurant at one end and the great local restaurants at the other end, with a few bars and shops thrown in.
38
@34, if you're going to spend the money anyways, why not make it work FOR you? Not government-owned food carts, but a subsidy for anyone willing to open a food cart and maintain it for five years -- like urban homesteading. You pay no taxes, and get a free cart, and if you're still there in five years you get to keep it. Wouldn't cost hardly anything by city waste standards. Give 'em a bonus if they're immigrants.
That's off the top of my head. Wouldn't work? Well, you probably wouldn't have to do it, if you'd just remove all the barriers that now exist to food carts. Make it a single permit, and give them unrestricted access to any part of the city -- I'll bet hundreds would open up. Let 'em block the sidewalk all they want. Let 'em in the alleys. Make it a contest. Make Seattle famous for it. Any property or restaurant owners who utter a peep of complaint get concrete overshoes and dropped in the harbor.
Cascadian, I think you're probably right, and I'm overstating my case in this instance; but I feel I HAVE to, to counter the vacuousness and counterproductivity of New Urbanism. Seattle doesn't need to spend money to improve amenities for yuppies; they've got plenty of money of their own. And if you give them an inch of sidewalk, they'll be back for the street in a year's time, for sure.
And this Bell St. thing is four blocks long. I know it's an awfully attractive idea to extend the sheer gloriosity of Regrade Park (which this would abut), what with the dogshit and crackheads, but I'm against it. Actually, I wonder if this plan isn't really motivated not by any desire for parks but as an excuse to wrap chain link around Kelly's Bar until they go out of business.
That's off the top of my head. Wouldn't work? Well, you probably wouldn't have to do it, if you'd just remove all the barriers that now exist to food carts. Make it a single permit, and give them unrestricted access to any part of the city -- I'll bet hundreds would open up. Let 'em block the sidewalk all they want. Let 'em in the alleys. Make it a contest. Make Seattle famous for it. Any property or restaurant owners who utter a peep of complaint get concrete overshoes and dropped in the harbor.
Cascadian, I think you're probably right, and I'm overstating my case in this instance; but I feel I HAVE to, to counter the vacuousness and counterproductivity of New Urbanism. Seattle doesn't need to spend money to improve amenities for yuppies; they've got plenty of money of their own. And if you give them an inch of sidewalk, they'll be back for the street in a year's time, for sure.
And this Bell St. thing is four blocks long. I know it's an awfully attractive idea to extend the sheer gloriosity of Regrade Park (which this would abut), what with the dogshit and crackheads, but I'm against it. Actually, I wonder if this plan isn't really motivated not by any desire for parks but as an excuse to wrap chain link around Kelly's Bar until they go out of business.
40
Ok, got it. Since there's no money to subsidize food carts, your one idea is removing barriers to food carts.
Excellent idea. Any others?
Excellent idea. Any others?
41
The homesteading we used to have? That was with lots of free land taken from the natives.
Since there are no natives with carts that we can steal, the cart-steading idea won't work as folks wouldn't want to fund the free carts, much less to immigrants. The idea should be feasible!
Since there are no natives with carts that we can steal, the cart-steading idea won't work as folks wouldn't want to fund the free carts, much less to immigrants. The idea should be feasible!
42
Recognizing a bad idea as bad should not require someone to come up with a good one. "That will make things worse" can be useful input on its own.
43
Zander, Seattle Center is one of the most dismal failures of town planning in the world, and has been for almost fifty years. You know what was there before? Streets with houses on them. Houses full of poor people, yes; houses of a type that hasn't really survived in Seattle, but which would probably be worth about a million bucks a pop today if they did, like similar neighborhoods in all sorts of American cities.
Why do you think they have been trying to "fix it" for so many decades?
Lower Queen Anne next door, in contrast, is a lively neighborhood, with as high a density of pedestrian traffic as you'll find anywhere in the city. Yet they have cars, and street parking, and the boring old-fashioned grid, pretty much unchanged since it was first erected in what, the 1920s?
What do you think people knew in the 1920s that they don't now? How did Lower Queen Anne get to be so hip? What role did city planners play in the process by which that happened?
You don't have answers to these questions, do you? You have "Cities of europe", but are you really looking at them? At us?
I'm really not trying to be an asshole -- scratch that, yes I am. It is my gift. But I mostly know what I'm talking about here. I'm not trying to "landmark a parking lot", whatever that means. I suspect that at root we desire many of the same things. I just get crazy frustrated by "ooh, look, just get out of your car and everything will be PURRFECT!" talk. It's not connected to reality at any point. It's blind; it's historically and socially ignorant.
Why do you think they have been trying to "fix it" for so many decades?
Lower Queen Anne next door, in contrast, is a lively neighborhood, with as high a density of pedestrian traffic as you'll find anywhere in the city. Yet they have cars, and street parking, and the boring old-fashioned grid, pretty much unchanged since it was first erected in what, the 1920s?
What do you think people knew in the 1920s that they don't now? How did Lower Queen Anne get to be so hip? What role did city planners play in the process by which that happened?
You don't have answers to these questions, do you? You have "Cities of europe", but are you really looking at them? At us?
I'm really not trying to be an asshole -- scratch that, yes I am. It is my gift. But I mostly know what I'm talking about here. I'm not trying to "landmark a parking lot", whatever that means. I suspect that at root we desire many of the same things. I just get crazy frustrated by "ooh, look, just get out of your car and everything will be PURRFECT!" talk. It's not connected to reality at any point. It's blind; it's historically and socially ignorant.
44
Well, if we're wrong Fnarf, it looks like there's an awful lot of us.
I love the idea, and think it would be excellent to stroll down. Crackheads or not. Right now they're just on the street and there's not that much room to maneuver.
I love the idea, and think it would be excellent to stroll down. Crackheads or not. Right now they're just on the street and there's not that much room to maneuver.
45
Fnarf, Darling, you know I adore you - and I agree with you about 95% on this post. Engineered pedestrian malls are a horrible idea - I went through it the first time, in the 60's, and that was enough.
But I think you are off base in your criticism of the Seattle Center. Not only do I think it is a wonderful civic campus, (that has paid for itself multiple times), I'd argue that it helped revive, and "make hip" the previously moribund part of town known as Lower Queen Anne. Without the Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne would have been just and extension of Belltown - an area which was desolate just a decade or so ago.
But I think you are off base in your criticism of the Seattle Center. Not only do I think it is a wonderful civic campus, (that has paid for itself multiple times), I'd argue that it helped revive, and "make hip" the previously moribund part of town known as Lower Queen Anne. Without the Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne would have been just and extension of Belltown - an area which was desolate just a decade or so ago.
47
I'd like to honestly know why the City doesn't simply eminent domain certain city blocks entirely for several block sized parks downtown. New York City had Central Park, and the foresight to reserve a huge chunk of land within the core of the city decades ago... today if they started trying to do the same thing, it would be impossible. But how big was New York City before they implemented the idea? About the size Seattle is presently correct?
Why can't the City Council and Parks Dept strap on some serious balls, and propose that they will not only convert a street into a park, but the entire city block with it.
Sure the idea is very bold and likely will create a hailstorm of controversy, but if they are going to be as stupid crazy as this idea is, why not shoot for the moon?
Any "park" that is surrounded by huge tall walls of condos and other tall structures completely defeats the purpose of wide open space that allows sunlight down onto the greenery. This idea is complete folly to call it a true "park". Call it what it is... a concrete jungle with potted plants, fake greenspace with iron and umbrellas to protect from the rain on oversized pedestrian parking lots.
Seattle is a joke of a city more and more every day....
Why can't the City Council and Parks Dept strap on some serious balls, and propose that they will not only convert a street into a park, but the entire city block with it.
Sure the idea is very bold and likely will create a hailstorm of controversy, but if they are going to be as stupid crazy as this idea is, why not shoot for the moon?
Any "park" that is surrounded by huge tall walls of condos and other tall structures completely defeats the purpose of wide open space that allows sunlight down onto the greenery. This idea is complete folly to call it a true "park". Call it what it is... a concrete jungle with potted plants, fake greenspace with iron and umbrellas to protect from the rain on oversized pedestrian parking lots.
Seattle is a joke of a city more and more every day....
48
Ohh and one last rant ... if the City of Seattle Planning Dept actually had brains and foresight, they would have required an additional 10 feet of setback from the current curb for all future projects. Imagine if that corridor already had those additional mandated setbacks, how much additional total green footage would exist for these new "urban utopias"?
50
I want to respond mainly to Ffnarf but to anyone criticizing this project as a romantic ideal destined for failure:
You keep making these claims that somehow this project will create blight where it doesn't exist when the whole point of this green street is to improve an area that is already heavily blighted. The city sees an under utilized street that is overrun with shady activities and they are trying to find ways to encourage other pedestrian activity that can bring more eyes into the area and hopefully mitigate some of the sketchiness.
Once something like drug dealing starts it is extremely difficult to get rid of and tends to create a vicious cycle leading to more illicit activities. At first people are reluctant to take the route and much of the Bell St. foot traffic is dispersed to other E-W streets. With little foot traffic except drug dealers and users businesses are reluctant to set up shop towards this street so we are left with blank wallsand empty windows. Then with few destinations, you get even less foot traffic, and so on and so forth. The ensuing vacuum of legal activity acts as a magnet for more of the illegal kind.
While Regrade Park was a first attempt at improving the area, it didn't quite work to end the illicit activity (although it still provided a great amenity for Belltown dog owners). This new green street is another attempt. With some more interesting things to look at and more space for pedestrians (especially enticing for joggers) hopefully it will concentrate more of Belltown's already heavy foot traffic on to bell street. With more life here as well as a public amenity, hopefully more businesses and future developers will orient their retail towards Bell. These in turn will encourage even more foot traffic and before we know it Bell will be a vibrant, comfortable pedestrian corridor.
Your ridiculous claims of this destroying the businesses along Bell are absurd. The street is a pedestrian dead-zone as it stands and trying to draw people there with a little more open space certainly won't make anything worse. In fact the worst thing that could happen is that the area will remain under-walked and over drug dealt, only now with a few more trees to oxygenate the air.
More...
You keep making these claims that somehow this project will create blight where it doesn't exist when the whole point of this green street is to improve an area that is already heavily blighted. The city sees an under utilized street that is overrun with shady activities and they are trying to find ways to encourage other pedestrian activity that can bring more eyes into the area and hopefully mitigate some of the sketchiness.
Once something like drug dealing starts it is extremely difficult to get rid of and tends to create a vicious cycle leading to more illicit activities. At first people are reluctant to take the route and much of the Bell St. foot traffic is dispersed to other E-W streets. With little foot traffic except drug dealers and users businesses are reluctant to set up shop towards this street so we are left with blank wallsand empty windows. Then with few destinations, you get even less foot traffic, and so on and so forth. The ensuing vacuum of legal activity acts as a magnet for more of the illegal kind.
While Regrade Park was a first attempt at improving the area, it didn't quite work to end the illicit activity (although it still provided a great amenity for Belltown dog owners). This new green street is another attempt. With some more interesting things to look at and more space for pedestrians (especially enticing for joggers) hopefully it will concentrate more of Belltown's already heavy foot traffic on to bell street. With more life here as well as a public amenity, hopefully more businesses and future developers will orient their retail towards Bell. These in turn will encourage even more foot traffic and before we know it Bell will be a vibrant, comfortable pedestrian corridor.
Your ridiculous claims of this destroying the businesses along Bell are absurd. The street is a pedestrian dead-zone as it stands and trying to draw people there with a little more open space certainly won't make anything worse. In fact the worst thing that could happen is that the area will remain under-walked and over drug dealt, only now with a few more trees to oxygenate the air.
51
If they think that is going to drive out the homeless and crackheads then what about Kelleys on Bell and Third and the meth clinic, Matt Talbot Center. There is a lot more they could do than just tearing up streets and making parking even worse and more of a monopoly.
52
one thing that bothers me is that we have a dying pioneer square on our hands already. i know it's a whole 15 blocks away, practically another planet, but city money will be needed for both.
i love parks and would probably go to this one. however, i am always wary of narrower streets, car and bike -wise. i'll bet the cops can't wait to add it to their top ten needs-to-be patrolled areas.
i love parks and would probably go to this one. however, i am always wary of narrower streets, car and bike -wise. i'll bet the cops can't wait to add it to their top ten needs-to-be patrolled areas.
53
The City has to pay for land it takes through eminent domain (unlike in Canada!). See: Mercer St. project.
The Bell St. park is great. The problem is that it's a one-off thing that the Parks Dept. came up with, not SDOT or DPD. That doesn't bode well for creating more of these. Some of the city bureaucracy is calcified and stubbornly refuses to change outdated ways of doing things. Hopefully this will be a popular success that translates into demands for more such projects around the city.
The idea that cars bring in customers is silly. Same as the argument about removing parking, like in Fremont and Ballard (used by business owners and employees, not customers). Cars waste a buttload of space to move 1 person. On foot you can get far more people in the same space. If you're talking about transit (like 15th Ave. NW in Ballard where the city caved in to NIMBYs who won't trade parking for BRT lanes), each transit vehicle dumps far more customers in front of stores than the same amount of space if used by cars instead. Pedestrian parking is way cheaper too.
The Bell St. park is great. The problem is that it's a one-off thing that the Parks Dept. came up with, not SDOT or DPD. That doesn't bode well for creating more of these. Some of the city bureaucracy is calcified and stubbornly refuses to change outdated ways of doing things. Hopefully this will be a popular success that translates into demands for more such projects around the city.
The idea that cars bring in customers is silly. Same as the argument about removing parking, like in Fremont and Ballard (used by business owners and employees, not customers). Cars waste a buttload of space to move 1 person. On foot you can get far more people in the same space. If you're talking about transit (like 15th Ave. NW in Ballard where the city caved in to NIMBYs who won't trade parking for BRT lanes), each transit vehicle dumps far more customers in front of stores than the same amount of space if used by cars instead. Pedestrian parking is way cheaper too.
54
Street life isn't a park.
The problem is many in Seattle don't realize "urban and vibrant" is not about parks and greenery.
What urban vibrancy is is Greenwich Village, Left Bank etc. Lots of activity, pedestrians, clubs, bars, bakeries, cafes, etc. Strolling and people watching. People like to buy food and drink and see music and go to bars and hang out and flirt and watch people.
Urban parks in contrast are usually pretty empty; the Seattle Center most of the time, Denny park Freeway Park, Myrtle Edwards Park. There's nothing to do there. In fact, urban parks become scary as hell at night.
Check out NYC activity on 4th st. in the Village, versus in Washington Square Park -- after dark. No one goes to an urban park saying wow, gang let's go look at the bushes tonight!
And yes, nearly all the major street scapes that are chock full of people are chock full of cars, too. You can have a few car free areas but yes, you need parking spaces so people come from the whole region and walk around the car free areas, duh. Transit can help on this but cars help too.
The problem is many in Seattle don't realize "urban and vibrant" is not about parks and greenery.
What urban vibrancy is is Greenwich Village, Left Bank etc. Lots of activity, pedestrians, clubs, bars, bakeries, cafes, etc. Strolling and people watching. People like to buy food and drink and see music and go to bars and hang out and flirt and watch people.
Urban parks in contrast are usually pretty empty; the Seattle Center most of the time, Denny park Freeway Park, Myrtle Edwards Park. There's nothing to do there. In fact, urban parks become scary as hell at night.
Check out NYC activity on 4th st. in the Village, versus in Washington Square Park -- after dark. No one goes to an urban park saying wow, gang let's go look at the bushes tonight!
And yes, nearly all the major street scapes that are chock full of people are chock full of cars, too. You can have a few car free areas but yes, you need parking spaces so people come from the whole region and walk around the car free areas, duh. Transit can help on this but cars help too.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Liveblogging the Washington State House Debate and Vote
onIN FAVOR OF GAY MARRIAGE by Eli Sanders -
Penn Jillette Thinks Lindy West Is a Cunty Cunt! by David Schmader
-
House Hearing on Gay Marriage by Eli Sanders
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
It's Not Over Until We Say It's Over by Dan Savage
-
Jeff Bezos' Racist, Pro-Life, Anti-Evolution, Rape-Apologist Search Engine by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Tower of Label by Dan Savage
-
Which Kind of Bus Person Are You? by Megan Seling
-
Yesterday's Best Arguments Against Gay Marriage by Eli Sanders
-
You Guys, the Superbowl Is Happening Right Now! by Grant Brissey
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (54) RSS