Port Angeles Historic District Approved by State
Washington State's Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has approved the creation of the Port Angeles Civic Historical District.
The district consists of three buildings on Lincoln Street: the original Clallam County Courthouse building, the Museum at the Carnegie, and the building that has previously been the council chambers, jail and fire hall.
The district consists of three buildings on Lincoln Street: the original Clallam County Courthouse building, the Museum at the Carnegie, and the building that has previously been the council chambers, jail and fire hall.
posted by Tom Harper at 12:45 AM
20 Comments:
Glad to see this. Not sure it will create the tourism draw Don Perry hopes for, but, it can't hurt anything.
It would be nice to protect the other remaining historical buildings on Lincoln Street, too, so that the visitors who go back and forth on HWY 101 have some sense of the historical context and interesting architectural features of the city. The courthouse, the old Carnegie library and the fire hall are a good start. Already Jefferson School, anchoring the south end of Lincoln, has been renovated to maintain much of its historical character. Next, try to protect the Masonic Temple and Naval Elks building. And, for heaven's sake, city planners, please carefully consider what you allow to be built near or across the street from historic structures on Lincoln St. Too bad the idea for preserving the historical district wasn't in the minds of those who permitted the Safeway gas station.
"Too bad the idea for preserving the historical district wasn't in the minds of those who permitted the Safeway gas station."
Yes, well, that would assume the planners cared about the support for and creation of a "historic district" in Port Angeles. As we keep seeing, these planners like to blather on with such nice sounding phrases about conservation and preservation, until it comes to actual application.
Then, it is just "build, baby, build".
And then you end up with land use conflicts, just as you point out.
Are they stupid? Don't they plan for anything? Any minute now an earthquake and tsunami will wipe out everything to 8th street! Why make that a historic district when it will just be destroyed in the impending disaster?! If downtown doesn't close its doors first!! Why bother do anything??? We're all doomed!!
"If downtown doesn't close its doors first!! Why bother do anything??? We're all doomed!!"
Right.
Your sarcasm is duly noted.
If we return to the way you like it, we ignore everything, and have our future generations deal with the messes we make. We create incredible debt because we want services, but don't want to vote for the taxes to pay for what we want.
We build in known hazardous zones, deriding anyone who voices concern and caution as "tin foil hat" looneys, hoping that we will enjoy the profits from speculative developments, hoping the disasters will strike after we are dead and gone. Money in our pockets today, and let future generations deal with the aftermath. A strategy of passing really big problems onto our children, so we can be "rich", today.
How much of what the recent earthquakes and tsunamis destroyed was built with the knowledge it was being built in a hazardous area? Do you think the developers or city planners are going to be held accountable?
Hell no. That's just business.
Just like our current city manager, who will accept his salary, and move on to a new community.
Why is planning for known problems such a bad thing?
"Why is planning for known problems such a bad thing?"
Because...
A - You're not talking about "planning" you're saying "We build in known hazardous zones, deriding anyone who voices concern". A tsunami like Japan's could create a debris field up to about 8th St. you're talking about a no-build zone from the water to 8th street. Seriously?
B - Scientists are sure there's going to be a bad earthquake here, just like in Japan. Not a matter of if, matter of when. They've been saying that for decades. Could be decades more. Could make a bad tsunami. Could not. I refuse to live my life being so scared of something that might happen someday I stop living. Whatever floats your boat tho.
C - I'm all for being prepared, but it sounds to me like you want to abandon Port Angeles. Here's how I would be prepared: setup a tsunami warning syustem (check), plan tsunami evacuation routes (check, sort of), have frequent emergancy drills with first responders (I don't know), have a plan in place for food and temporary shelters (is that why we bought the bubble dome?), build decent evacutaion and supply routes in and out of town (d'oh!)
D - who's being sarcastic? you have a "why bother" attitude towards anything in tsunami range, that includes the historic district. Think it would survive a tsunami like Japan's? Hell no! So why bother making a historic district at all, right?
Hey - Lincoln Street as high up as the old fire hall and beyond will be saved from a tsunami because the natural breakwater of Ediz Hook will protect the harbor and downtown, right?
Fear not!
Sasquatch will guide the chosen few away from danger and to a secret alien base where the chosen few will be whisked away to safety!
In the meantime, tread gently upon Gaia and work to overthrow the Patriarchy.
Blessed be!
"A tsunami like Japan's could create a debris field up to about 8th St. you're talking about a no-build zone from the water to 8th street. Seriously?"
Sigh.
It looks like you need to do a bit of studying about what "planning" means.
Please do so, before wasting time with silly rhetoric.
Using the example of the strip clubs and adult book stores not being allowed within considerable proximity to children's schools, we also know both are allowed to operate in a given town.
"Planning" in the context of land use usually means a variety of circumstances, conditions, policies, neighborhood concerns and other factors are taken into consideration before building permits are issued.
You might also have heard about this other thing, called "litigation". Many courts and juries pay close attention to "prior knowledge". Did the defendant know in advance that their "product" was defective, built with flawed design (remember the Ford/Pinto case?), or likely to cause death or injury.
Clearly, nobody sues over real estate deals that have gone bad.
Look at the anguished faces of those suffering the losses of loved ones in Japan, and tell me about warning sirens.
""A tsunami like Japan's could create a debris field up to about 8th St. you're talking about a no-build zone from the water to 8th street. Seriously?"
Sigh.
It looks like you need to do a bit of studying about what "planning" means."
Maybe you want to tone down your sarcasm and start being more specific. Yes, I understand people can sue other people and, yes, I understand the concept of zoning laws preventing a strip club from being built next to a school (or, say, a porn store being built two blocks from a school... oh wait...). We could pass laws requiring new buildings to be more earthquake proof, fine, I can understand your argument there. But there isn't much you can do about a tsunami of that magnitude other than stay out of its way. That is the only zoning law that would work. So I ask you: are you saying we shouldn't build in an area likely to be affected by a tsunami of the magnitude that just hit Japan (waterfront to Safeway)? Yes or no question, no snark required, let's see if you can do this.
we COULD enforce the building codes on the books and at, the very least, get the asbestos out of the downtown buildings, and maybe put in some fire sprinklers, and perhaps bring the electrical up to code. Right now the downtown is more of a firetrap -- tinder box waiting to go up in flames -- than anything else. It would go up in a flash, too. Hardly any firewalls between all those downtown buildings.
If there were even a 7.0 quake, the downtown would crumble....all the buildings have un-reinforced lower levels, and mostly brick and stone masonry. Then, there is the issue of liquifaction AND the fact that the sandstone cliffs have no strength at all, and would crumble. Downtown is a goner, for so many reasons.
We could, MAYBE, enact stronger earthquake building standards (what is it now...every 8 feet for tie downs to the foundation....not exactly "modern").
We could get clearer access roads and evacuation signs, and have more drills in the event of a Tsunami. We could have more drills to prepare for an earthquake...
Lets review: the hospital is on a bluff. Downtown would be destroyed. Most of the older buildings would crumble. Most older houses would be knocked off their foundations. Highway 101 would have landslides, and the Hood Canal Bridge might be out of service for several days. We'd all be stuck here....together. We have one way in, one way out. We have a very, very un-community community. Would we resort to bands of looters? Seriously, folks....what sort of neighborhood groups do we have? What sort of emergency planning has really happened here?
I wish WTF were here to sort you both out!
Tsunamis, zoning laws, adult bookstores, who wrote "Wuthering Heights" - he knows it all and he's bad ass, man!
New construction should not be allowed in flood plains or likely tsunami zones. I am not being sarcastic. I truly believe this.
Precautionary principle said...
New construction should not be allowed in flood plains or likely tsunami zones. I am not being sarcastic. I truly believe this.
8:23 AM, March 20, 2011
......
If you look up the policies, guidelines, etc, most all already say that. In Port Angeles, they are not being adhered to.
Hmmm. So - building codes and guidelines are not being followed in Port Angeles? That's pretty disturbing. Is there anyone in local government who can be trusted to enforce the law and protect the public interest?!?
building codes only are enforced for NEW buildings, or remodels. Since the building owners are (mostly) a bunch of tight-wads and slumlords, they make the renters do any upgrades, which is why none are done at all. There are no laws on the books to force a building owner to bring his business up to standards, or to even make them safe.
Meanwhile, the city won't do it because they'd end up with a vacant downtown, most likely. State won't do crap, even for the friable asbestos. (Meaning it can get into the air!!)
So, we have to wait for it to burn or fall down, or get washed away.
"Hmmm. So - building codes and guidelines are not being followed in Port Angeles? That's pretty disturbing. Is there anyone in local government who can be trusted to enforce the law and protect the public interest?!?"
And:
"building codes only are enforced for NEW buildings, or remodels."
Really? How about the NEW "CSO" project being built in a known hazard/tsunami zone? The biggest project in the city's history, and all those nice sounding policies just don't seem to apply.
just because something is zoned "tsunami" doesn't mean it's a sure thing, unless it's Crescent City. The reality is -- no one in this area thinks that we're really in any danger. Heck, we don't even have very rigorous earthquake standards. The number of tiedowns needed for a foundation is 1/3 the number recommended in "earthquake zones".
Meanwhile, I don't recollect the inspector asking if my water heater was strapped. I don't remember needing to add extra plywood in my ceiling below the chimney. Our building inspector is a GREAT GUY, but he can only enforce what is on the books. The seismic standards here are a JOKE. Not to mention, all the unreinforced masonry buildings downtown, and as foundations, and...well, look around!! I won't even STEP into the Landing because there is no way it would stay up in a major quake. I'd rather not hang out in something that is built on piers, thanks.
But, things can be built in earthquake zones, in tsunami zones, ...land is land, right? Hell, people around here build in dry washes, and they build next to visible fault valleys. They build communities next to slightly-dormant volcanoes and THEN only have one road in/out.
How stupid are people in Washington state?
"But, things can be built in earthquake zones, in tsunami zones, ...land is land, right? Hell, people around here build in dry washes, and they build next to visible fault valleys. They build communities next to slightly-dormant volcanoes and THEN only have one road in/out."
Well, if you remember the big floods in the MidWest in the 90s, and followed the aftermath, you will remember that the riverside districts that were damaged, were not allowed to rebuild in the flood plain. Federal policy, because the taxpayers were getting tired of repeatedly footing the bill after disasters.
Most sane municipal planning locates parks, parking lots, playing fields and other such needed community uses in these flood plains. The water rises, the water recedes, a little cleaning, and everybody is happy.
It is not that nothing is built in known hazardous zones. It is through good planning that the community manages these areas in a thoughtful, and cost effective way.
But knowingly building residences, and crucial public infrastructure in hazardous zones is just plain irresponsible.
Not to derail this fascinating conversation about the futility of man's reach, but I saw our fearless blog leader got in the paper yesterday. I like that PADA is promoting the "Second Story" concept. Other downtowns mix retail, restaurants, residential, office spaces, museums, libraries, etc etc, becoming more of "resort".
When gas was going up I noticed a trend more towards micro-communities, where towns were broken up into hubs, residential areas surrounding smaller stores, places of work, parks, etc. The idea being you can cut back your commute time by primarily shopping, working and playing within these hubs. We have small hubs here (downtown, 8th st & C) but nothing is really developed or promoted except downtown. Odd.
Anyway, back to it!
"But there isn't much you can do about a tsunami of that magnitude other than stay out of its way. "
Ha ha, run or die, dude, run or die!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home