The Great Boulevard Feud
A former city attorney accuses real estate speculators of using park plans to drive up land values.
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.
John J. McGilvra writes to the Post-Intelligencer to dispute a proposal for a system of parks and boulevards. He argues that the board of park commissioners lacks legal authority to establish highways, suggesting the scheme originated with real estate men to create a 'fictitious map' that would aid in selling property. McGilvra, a pioneer attorney who helped establish the Maynard donation claim in 1875, warns the city council against the plan, asserting that the 'kids'—the young men currently in charge—are squandering the legacy of the pioneers.
“The whole thing smacks and smells of fraud and corruption, and is so wild and visionary that it ought to be frowned out of existence at once.”
McGilvra's suspicion that boulevards were merely 'real estate schemes' reflects a classic tension in Seattle's history: the struggle between public good and the influence of developers in shaping the city's geography. This argument mirrors contemporary battles over land use and gentrification in neighborhoods across the city.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.