Port Angeles Waterfront Workshops
posted by Tom Harper at 4:50 PM
Monday, September 27, 2010
About Me
- Name: Tom Harper
- Location: Olympic Peninsula, Washington, United States
Previous Posts
- State Supreme Court Sides with Port Angeles on Flu...
- Harbor-Works Will Return $168,588
- “Port Angeles: The Authentic Northwest”
- Clallam Business Incubator Might Dissolve
- Jefferson County Commissioner Candidate: “Them Bl...
- Mental Health Home in Cherry Hill Neighborhood
- R Bar Incident, PDN Articles and Disappearing Comm...
- A Chance to Express Your Opinion
- Requiring Voter Approval for Public Development Au...
- Harbor-Works Meeting this Thursday
33 Comments:
I have complete confidence that they will get it all wrong.
Committees makes whole groups of otherwise intelligent people stupid.
And I don't think that anyone there understands the real realities of what waterfronts should be like, I could write a whole damn book about that.
The only man I've ever talked to that understood the reality of what a waterfront should be like died about five years ago.
Too bad, we had a real good connection.
Waterfront and Port Angeles?
"Port Angeles: We know the best use for waterfronts are smokestack industries."
Get a clue!
As long as the smokestacks dominate the views, the "redevelopment" options for Port Angeles are VERY limited.
I have to break my comment do to space here.
"Port Angeles: We know the best use for waterfronts are smokestack industries."
I would like to point out that they have been very lucky here. While it is important for some industries to be on a waterfront others should stay away from it and leave most of it to nature.
Boat building and things to do with water transportation for example need to be on a waterfront, but little other.
IF, this area gets hit with a huge quake and Tsunami you will promptly lose some of the biggest employers here, the paper mill for example.
The downtown area could be wasted, removing even more employers, AND housing because monkeys are stupid and insist on living on waterfronts.
We're sitting on a time bomb, but I don't suppose anything will be done about it until after the fact, then if they are wise they'll rebuild the paper mill in a higher location.
Will you monkeys ever wise up? Enjoy waterfronts but don't crowd and clutter them with stupid stuff.
If you all get in big trouble I'm not going to feel bad for you because it was your stupid thinking that got you there.
As long as the smokestacks dominate the views, the "redevelopment" options for Port Angeles are VERY limited.
Are they ? I can think of a number of places where they coexist. The area adjacent to the Ballard Locks , Most of the Ship Canal, a good portion of Lake Union. The Area from Interbay all the way to Myrtle Edwards Park, etc. to name just a few. Maybe it’s just me, but I think driving “through” the Nippon mill on the way to the Spit is pretty cool, really. Maybe if we tried integrating our industrial stuff with the rest of the landscape, instead of being so ashamed of our working class roots, we could get to a place where they all could coexist.
Here’s an idea: dump every bit of “Downtown Art” that doesn’t specifically speak to heritage and history- (shove it up on the hill by the college), and replace it with parts and pieces of old logging, mill, and fishing equipment. Some of it restored and repainted, some rusty and worn. Big stuff, like the flywheel at Crown Z park. Make a statement about Port Angeles, as opposed to somebody else’s “art for sale”. We need to quit trying to homogenize the area and be ourselves, warts and all.. If we leave this to outside planning, we’ll end up like Sequim, once one of the prettiest features on the North Olympic Peninsula, it’s now a sort of Renton or Auburn (but without Seattle to justify its existence.)
This reminds me of the same issues I see with the Rayonier mill site.
So many of the "supporters" of HarborWorks get all starry-eyed about the "potential" for the site, and list off all the development possibilities. Currently, Mike Gentry and Ron Allen are pushing their "Salish Village" plans for the site, which they describe as "intensively developed" with all kinds of uses, including a conference center.
The drawings look appealing. Colorful and dramatic. But, they don't include the realities of the surrounding uses. No smokestacks or industrial infrastructure is depicted.
In fact, Ron Allen was quoted in the PDN as saying that industrial uses would not be appropriate as part of the Salish Village concept.
But guess what? Unless all the patrons of his development are blind, deaf and cannot smell, the reality is that Port Angeles' waterfront is dominated by smokestack industrial uses. And, proud of it.
Potential developers will look at "market conditions", and correctly conclude that Port Angeles has too many negative attributes to be overcome, to make any such development proposals economically viable.
As the "due diligence" studies pointed out.
Wake up, stop dreaming, and address reality.
"WTF? said...
As long as the smokestacks dominate the views, the "redevelopment" options for Port Angeles are VERY limited.
Are they ? I can think of a number of places where they coexist. The area adjacent to the Ballard Locks , Most of the Ship Canal, a good portion of Lake Union. The Area from Interbay all the way to Myrtle Edwards Park, etc. to name just a few."
Yes.. Good points. But, those examples, and I'll wager MOST "Brownfield remediation sites" that get used as successful examples ALL have very large regional populations that support them.
This is another common reality. Pick a commodity, whether it be real estate, food, clothing, movies, art, etc. Not all food appeals to everyone, any more than clothing, movies, and real estate. Yes, virtually EVERY style of clothing, movie genre, food type and real estate setting has it's devotees.
And, as you will see, the larger the regional population, the more diverse options are available. This is because with even the less popular styles, the more difficult art, the stranger movie themes, there are enough patrons in a large population to make them economically viable.
So, realizing there are about 70,000 people in the ENTIRE COUNTY, and a 100 miles to drive before a large population base exists, the options for Port Angeles are limited.
These are not new concepts, any more than these lands are not new. These lands have been available for development for many years. Developers are always looking for a good opportunity to make a buck, and we see often the risks they take in that pursuit. Remember the developers that built on the former chemical dump site, "Love Canal"?
Port Angeles has been here for around 150 years (as a "European" based community). More than one developer has looked over the area, in all those years.
It is as a result of those very exploitative decisions to make resource extraction industries the dominant priority that Port Angeles finds its' fate current cast.
The fact that the paper mill and K-Ply are not pretty does not bother me one wit.
I go by them all the time and simply don't pay any attention to them. What concerns me is that under the right conditions they will no longer be able to provide jobs and wages, simply because of their locations.
If you don't like the looks of something just tune it out, that's what you have a brain for, it can be selective.
What experience and history teach is this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles and lessons deduced from it.
Study the past if you would define the future.
I talked about the paper mill on my current post, but it had nothing to do about how it looks, just the biomass project.
Yes.. Good points. But, those examples, and I'll wager MOST "Brownfield remediation sites" that get used as successful examples ALL have very large regional populations that support them.
What I’m talking about has nothing to do wit “Brownfield “ It has to do with using what you have to advantage. The Nippon mill, for example, will remain as long as its profitable. Period. Rayonier folded because they could do it cheaper elsewhere . The areas I described were developed by market forces, as opposed to some concerted effort to reclaim or rehab the site involved.
It is as a result of those very exploitative decisions to make resource extraction industries the dominant priority that Port Angeles finds its' fate current cast.
Resource extraction industries were the basis for the founding of virtually every city in America. As industries become irrelevant, or obsolete, they are replaced by others in an endless cycle of birth death and renewal. As these processes progress, we find mixes of industry, commerce, residential, recreation, etc. And those mixes can be directed, enhanced and yes, exploited to the benefit of the residents of a given area. Sure, Port Angeles is small, so is Port Townsend. Both have stinky old mills and waterfront industry. One is a tourist destination, the other a “git town” (git gas, git groceries, and git the hell outta there) Why is that?
I don't have any problem with industry, but they need to wise up and build in wiser locations in the future.
Think back 200 years. Waterfronts attracted everything. Why? Transportation!! Most of it by horses and oxen.
But that picture has changed a lot, you can move anything quickly anymore, I know, I've been a long haul truck driver at two different times.
All I'm say is to wise up and build in wiser places. IF the mill happens to be destroyed and needs to be rebuilt rebuild it somewhere else, like on higher ground on the west side of town.
And let the spit return to what it can do best, nature and recreation.
One is a tourist destination, the other a “git town” (git gas, git groceries, and git the hell outta there) Why is that?
Because this is gateway to cooler things. And I don't have a problem with that being as there's already too many monkeys and too much traffic here in Monkeyville anyway.
Take the gas and grocery money, smile and pat them on the ass and send them on their way. :-)
We are a gateway to everything else in the area, is that so bad?
Don't forget to leave a tip.
"Here’s an idea: dump every bit of “Downtown Art” that doesn’t specifically speak to heritage and history"
I vote to keep the seahorse though. 'cause it's cool.
"WTF? said...
Yes.. Good points. But, those examples, and I'll wager MOST "Brownfield remediation sites" that get used as successful examples ALL have very large regional populations that support them.
What I’m talking about has nothing to do wit “Brownfield “ It has to do with using what you have to advantage. The Nippon mill, for example, will remain as long as its profitable. Period. "
Yes, I understand your points about "using what you have", and they do have merit. But, your examples do not address the fundamental realities associated with demographics, and the willingness of people to drive long distances to visit a town dominated by smokestacks. In the Seattle/ Olympia/Tacoma "I-5 corridor" (which constitutes something like one fifth of the entire states' population!), many things are economically possible, that have no hope 100 miles away.
Port Angeles offers a "nature experience" not available closer to the I-5 folks? They can't go kayaking closer? See mountains closer? Go hiking on trails closer?
Obviously, what we offer, despite those WEAK ads by Russ, is not enough to keep the local storefronts open.
So, do you really think a redesigned waterfront promenade, which will provide tourists with a better view of the waterfront industry in the Port Angeles harbor, is really going to change things?
Don't get me wrong. I can cite all kinds of hugely successful "remote" tourist destinations that consist of small towns. I cannot think of one that is dominantly "industrial".
So, we get back to what the local reactionaries say. "Tourism is not a viable option". Well, yes, just as surely as a Rolls Royce will not go anywhere without gas.
As things are, today, Port Angeles' "waterfront" is not doing much. Where is the "gas" going to come from?
Where is the "gas" going to come from?
I don't know where it comes from but there's more than enough of it to keep the streets full of monkeymobiles.
I'll assume that they are all running around doing important shit and driving the economy.
That reminds me, I need to fill my gas tank today so I can boat Lake Crescent tomorrow, the rest of you monkeys will be in charge while I'm gone.
So, do you really think a redesigned waterfront promenade, which will provide tourists with a better view of the waterfront industry in the Port Angeles harbor, is really going to change things?
Not in the least. I think a “redesigned” waterfront promenade will result in another chapter of ” Waste our limited Financial Recourses.” The idea that “tourism” in and of itself will save us economically is as crazy as the idea that we can magically transform the old mill site into a money making proposition. Since the mill shut down in 1997 , we’ve seen every scheme imaginable to restore those lost 600 or so jobs . We’re like co-dependent spouses , wishing and desperately hoping that “this time” the lie will become truth. Aint gonna happen. What success we’ve experienced in that period, is small, diverse, and with little or no “help” from local government. So, I only believe in what actually works. I’ve really had it with “plans” and somebody else’s “vision.”
I vote to keep the seahorse though. 'cause it's cool.
Oh heck yes, Billy, the Seahourse, Salmon, whales, etc. are part of heritage and history...the rusty people, etc., gone to the hillside, or the scrapper.
If the price of iron goes up again the rusty people just might go to the scrapper, it wouldn't break my heart any.
So is the old whorehouse part of our heritage, they should open it up again, a lot of men here go to Victoria to have fun with the ladies over there, that helps their economy but it's not doing ours a bit of good.
I'm seriously considering that myself.
So is the old whorehouse part of our heritage, they should open it up again, a lot of men here go to Victoria to have fun with the ladies over there, that helps their economy but it's not doing ours a bit of good.
Well there's a interesting bit of "Civic Planning" ... But I'm afraid it would only result in Git Gas, Git Groceries, Git Laid, and THEN Git the Hell outta here...Maybe we should just restore the building and then move our local politicians into it. That way, it would still be a whorehouse...
But I'm afraid it would only result in Git Gas, Git Groceries, Git Laid, and THEN Git the Hell outta here.
Hey, at least we would git screwed by something other than politicians, there must be something tangible in that.
Go to our fine library and look in the Victoria phone book for escort services and they'll fulfill your every need being as the women here won't.
Just saying.
As communities think about the future, and about ways to minimize carbon emissions, I don't think promoting long distance travel is going to gain a lot of traction.
(Yeah, Billys' trips to Victoria aside!)
So, plans for Port Angeles and the area in general need to think about ways NOT reliant upon people driving out here from the I-5 corridor. Of the communities becoming more self reliant and self sustainable.
What can that look like?
Went to the open house thing. I liked that a lot of the concept art incorporated native artwork. For a town surrounded by natives, we sure don't promote much native art.
Self-reliant would be a good thing, but I doubt it's going to happen. Port Angeles has its hand out too much, and it's been hoping and praying for a savior to arrive on a white horse for too many years. I'd love to see more diversity of jobs, but we'd have to start with smaller companies and grow from there and the city's always looking for huge solutions. Like Rayonier. It's too big for this area to support, but the city's still thinking that pouring a ton of money into that will solve all its problems. And tourism. They think making this a "tourist town" is THE answer, when it's actually just part of the solution.
As for the old whore house... that's so 20th century. Have the citizens of and visitors to Port Angeles make selections from web sites and phone apps, while outsource the maintenance to India. Yep, that's the ticket.
As for the old whore house... that's so 20th century.
I'm nostalgic that way, I like old country homes, old schools, old buildings, etc.
They seem homey. I'm not fond of modern Martha Stewart crap.
Why don't you rename this section to "Billy's comments on Tom's Blog". It would certainly get rid of the impression (semi-)interesting opinions may be found here...
Was listening to a radio program a bit ago that was talking about fuel costs. The guy, an "expert" in the industry, was predicting that the price of fuel will continue to rise, and as it rises, people will be driving less.
Not new information. We have heard this before, and have seen the impacts here in Port Angeles, as the tourist traffic has diminished from the days when people were sleeping on cots at Aggies. When cars were lined up on Railroad Ave. all night long, waiting for the next days' ferry to Victoria.
The reality of the continuing rise of the price of energy is a major factor for the future of Port Angeles. What new industries will locate here, when it costs that much more to transport everything in and out of here?
Port Angeles has been stagnating for a number of years now, as the national economy transitions from a manufacturing economy to a .. what?
When will the local "leadership" understand that the old ways of creating community don't work anymore?
Why don't you rename this section to "Billy's comments on Tom's Blog". It would certainly get rid of the impression (semi-)interesting opinions may be found here...
9:40 AM, September 30, 2010
As opposed to whiney crap from "anonymous" -right?
Billy comes as advertised- hell there's even a picture. if you don’t want to read his posts,(or mine, or anybody else's) I don't think there's any rule you have to.
Port Angeles has its hand out too much, and it's been hoping and praying for a savior to arrive on a white horse for too many years.
Port Angeles the city (as in city govt.) The local politicians we’ve had seem only interested in big projects they can get their pictures taken in front of. Perhaps if they concerned themselves with the business of Running a small town, rather than all the extraneous crap they’re constantly piddling with , they wouldn’t need a savior on a white horse to begin with.
The reality of the continuing rise of the price of energy is a major factor for the future of Port Angeles. What new industries will locate here, when it costs that much more to transport everything in and out of here?
Just bought a service manual from a guy online in New Hampshire. Downloaded it to a disc in my office in Port Angeles. Total gas used=zero.
When will the local "leadership" understand that the old ways of creating community don't work anymore?
Never...They will need to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the 21st Century.
Let's remember, this is a city that spends 14 million dollars for a bus stop, 40 thousand on rusty people, 300 thousand on an inflatable building, yet whose schools go begging for computers.
"Just bought a service manual from a guy online in New Hampshire. Downloaded it to a disc in my office in Port Angeles. Total gas used=zero."
Online business. Yes. Also not a new concept, as you pointed out. Service and "customer help" for so many things is now "outsourced" to East Indian call centers.
Why not Port Angeles? In the years these call centers have been set up, why haven't they been set up in Port Angeles?
Why not an "Amazon.com" computerized distribution facility?
Why not ANYTHING?
"Why not ANYTHING?"
Why not expand the ports and try to bring more imports from China here?
Why not a server bank for the "cloud"?
Why, when people mutter how we need an Amtrak here, don't we consider MagnaForce?
Why not push for tidal power? Or wind power? We've got enough of both here.
Why, since we're a logging town, isn't that logger's museum finished?
There's a lot of whys around here.
"Why not expand the ports and try to bring more imports from China here?
Why not a server bank for the "cloud"?
Why, when people mutter how we need an Amtrak here, don't we consider MagnaForce?
Why not push for tidal power? Or wind power? We've got enough of both here.
Why, since we're a logging town, isn't that logger's museum finished?
There's a lot of whys around here."
Well, most of these ideas will not fly for the same reasons as discussed earlier in this thread. Too small a resident population, too distant from major infrastructure, not enough money.
Why would a shipper off load their cargo in Port Angeles, only to have to pay extra to haul it the 100 miles to the I-5 corridor, when existing ports in Tacoma/Olympia/Seattle are right there? For example.
Existing little stores, and larger franchises cannot survive here, so those who study these things before advising their clients to "invest", see these realities.
As we see in the PDN, Peninsula Plywood has laid off 1/4 of it's workforce this week. They opened in March of this year. Already, they have "furloughed" almost half of their work force, earlier.
Not good for a "logging town".
This is not the new kind of approach we need to re-create Port Angeles. Communities around the world are facing grim times. No one is going to ride in and save us. We need to think smart, or else..
Post a Comment
<< Home