The Unfinished Dream of Connecting the Lakes
A look at the immense civic benefits of cutting a waterway between Lake Union and Lake Washington.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
We do not know if it is legally practicable for the county to take hold of the Lake Union and Washington canal project, but if it is, we cannot see a better project that can engage the attention of the new Board of Commissioners. The expense of a waterway through the little neck of land separating the two lakes would be only a few thousand dollars—from five to ten thousand, depending upon how thoroughly the work was done—while the benefit cannot be estimated short of quite as many thousands per annum. It would give our town a double waterfront at once, and every lot abutting the southern end of Lake Union would be increased in value 500 percent. It would also give the town a vast supply of good water, sufficient for every purpose needed in a town of a million inhabitants.
“It would give our town a double waterfront at once, and every lot abutting the southern end of Lake Union would be increased in value 500 percent.”
This editorial captures the early booster-spirit for what would eventually become the Montlake Cut. While the writer was primarily concerned with property values and water supply, their vision for a connected harbor system would permanently reshape Seattle’s geography and logistics.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.