The Price of a Pleasant View
Seattle's Park Commissioners argue that building green spaces isn't just for health, but a guaranteed economic engine.
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.
The park commission has prepared an elaborate report comparing Seattle's park area to world cities and arguing for the economic value of public land. The commission advocates for a grand park between Madison Point and the west shore of Lake Washington, connecting to existing rail lines. Citing Central Park in New York and Prospect Park in Brooklyn, the report claims that the increased tax valuation of nearby property more than compensates for the cost of the land and maintenance. The commission is currently under fire from critics like Judge McGilvra, who suggest the board is overstepping its authority and budget in planning new boulevards.
“There are few cities in the world for which nature has done so much as for the City of Seattle.”
Seattle’s struggle to balance massive urban expansion with green space is the same one we fight today. The commission’s 1893 argument—that parks are essentially 'earning capacity' for city revenue—is a direct ancestor to modern battles over real estate development and urban density.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.