Totally tacky. Goes against everything that an accessible downtown should be. Once in-place I’ll be sure to give it a little spit shine only with the shine part.

Link to my entries on the subject here and here

As I am not a big fan of the bridge to begin with and don’t mind that it be concealed in some way. It looks interesting from afar, but the closer one gets the less inviting it becomes.

Still, fundamental principles in directing foot traffic would suggest that if one wanted to attract activity, one would seek to illuminate the conduit. The bridge and its ends need activity. The entrances should be emphasized if there is any desire to increase pedestrian activity.

The Union Station environs seem to be playing games with that precarious balance between “private space” and “public space.” I would encourage them to err on the side of public. Make it open, inviting, and comfortable.

It doesn’t sound very attractive or appropriate, but…Does anyone have a link to a drawing of the proposed donor wall? How high is it? What are the dimensions? Why was this location chosen in the first place? Any input/links would be appreciated.

Those imbecile fat cats at the washington history museum have gone to far. What’s next? A moat? If they want people to take an interest in the history museum, why not do it with astonishing content? Way 2 go Washington State History Museum! I’m way under-impressed.

two steps forward. one step back

Even a “donor moat” would have been more interesting…

Nice work Kevin and Derek and the rest of everyone who worked on this (as well as the city staff who were proactive in getting a stop work order).

I am sure Dale Chihuly would not have wanted a brick wall at the end of the Bridge of Glass.

This was a good example how different governmental groups need to work together to avoid bizarre results.

A good choice for the end of the bridge of glass onto the street would be some sort of archway. Even just leaving it open for now would be much better.

Wouldn’t it be nice and inviting to be able to gaze across the bridge from the sidewalk on Pacific?

Point very well taken, Michael. The best thing about blogs is they can help get this kind of information out there when it may otherwise get looked over. How many people knew/cared who Tollefson was before the naming issue was taken up online? With that and this, I’d like to think awareness is raised just that much more no matter what opinions surface and outcomes come out.

Can’t get anything done around here without those dang bloggers blogging things up! ;-)

Very fascinating. Gotta agree with Michael’s point, too – Despite best efforts, sometimes I jump on the bandwagon without getting to know all the facts and history behind the issues. But we all wish for the best end result and in the end I think this helps get us there.

Ah, I rememeber those plaques, now. I always regretted not getting one.

“The best thing about blogs is they can help get this kind of information out there when it may otherwise get looked over.”

Michael: I really do appreciate the info you provided on this. If the local blog community can help raise awareness to even a handful more people then I think we’ve done something good. We certainly have our opinions but certainly don’t want to discourage anyone from expressing theirs or for helping everyone fill in holes in our understanding.

The donor wall element is not for donors to the museum; that already exists in the lobby of the History Museum. As Michael intimated above, the donor wall recognizes the citizen activists of Tacoma who led the charge 20 years to save the Station, most of whom would hardly qualify as “fat cats.”

Besides which, the wall is merely an armature upon which to tell the story about how citizen volunteer activism changed the destiny of Tacoma. Saving Union Station was and is the point of singularity (to put this in cosmological terms)out of which the revitalization of the neighborhood sprang. That, it seems, is a story worth telling.

Lastly, the perspective that is central to this situation is not from Pacific Avenue to the bridge (hardly the premier vantage point of the structure in any event) but from the bridge to the end of the plaza where Century Park would be built. I dare say some folks are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. Isn’t the view back towards Pacific Avenue important?

Saving Union Station was and is the point of singularity (to put this in cosmological terms)out of which the revitalization of the neighborhood sprang. That, it seems, is a story worth telling.

Yes, that is a story worth telling.

There are certainly appropriate ways to do this that do not block pedestrian traffic. Marty has thoughtfully suggested having placing them on the wall of the Cafe so that people can see them as they walk by. There are many other possibilities.

One of ways downtowns are revitalized is by having pedestrian friendly sidewalks and pathways that to not impair their flow.

It would be ironic to have a wall celebrating “citizen volunteers” who have worked to revitalize the city that would block the easy access to the Bridge of Glass.

My rough calculations show that the brick wall that was proposed would require pedestrians that sought to go to the Bridge of Glass to needlessly walk an additional 230 feet.

The Washington History Museum currently has unobstructed pathways to it from all directions.

Please give the Bridge of Glass, Glass Museum and the Foss Waterway the same consideration.

Its important to consider the collateral effects on your neighbors when designing such projects.

Mr. Nicandri, (and the News Tribune and whoever else, for that matter)

First of all, let me state for the record, that obviously not all (or most?) of the opinions expressed on this site belong to all of its readers. I am speaking specifically regarding myself.

It seems to me that blogs allow many opinions/personalities to be voiced in one central location. (But I will acknowledge that I am old enough to certainly not be an expert on this form of media.)

I do not know if certain postings come from experts in the fields of architecture, museums, government or civil engineering. What I do know is that I feel the need to express to you that many in our online community may be supportive of your efforts and appreciate your dedication to Tacoma. Many of us may realize the unique struggles of not-for-profits (particularly in Tacoma) and the delicate balance that is always involved with successfully running such.

While not closely connected to the Century Park project, it does occur to me that you may be focusing on the view, when most of the commenters seem to be more concerned about the civic design and pedestrian flow. I am offering that the different sides of the “debate” may likely not be seeing the same “problem” for lack of a better term.

Thank you for the opportunity to express these views.

I had a pretty good seat for most of the struggle to save Union Station and remember all too well how hard it was to advance good design decisions. The courthouse needed distance from public right of ways and even today you will notice that the original watery drawn glass windows are double glazed with bullet proof glass.

When SOS began advancing the notion of a
commemorative park or monument between the museum and Union Station, the City(which owns the Federal Courthouse for the next 25 years or so) was unexcited to say the least. So the park found a home on the museum’s site and after such ideas as a full scale sculpture of a steam locomotive SOS decided on building a park with tiles naming its supporters.

All this played out before there was a bridge or museum of glass but Arther Anderson was aware of it and the need to blend it into the passage between the 19th Street arch and the west approach to the bridge.

I think his concept for a donor wall is short of perfect but hey at least it was well considered from a design standpoint.

Does anybody else find it interesting that both this issue and the approval of the massive bay blocking canopy on Schuster Parkway are coming up after being given building permits. In the case of the wall at least there were public hearings at the Landmarks Commission but are we ever going to get a design commission where this stuff can get worked out in public?

I’m curious just where the heck you are walking from?, Erik. 230 feet from where? There is no parking on the East side of Pacific Ave. So you would have to be coming from either the Union Station lot, Museum lot, West-side of Pacific Ave, or the most logical transportation…the Light Rail. If you are driving North on Pacific you shouldn’t be gawking around for the bridge…you should be driving..better yet plan your trip so you know exactly where you are going and you won’t have to walk the streets lost looking for the bridge. If the area was totally wide open, you would have idiots thinking they can drive their car across the bridge and collapse the plaza onto an auditorium full of kids. It’s already been said, but what was there first? Not the bridge, not the glass museum…it was Union Station..it was the History Museum….so when you find a place to park or better yet get let off the light rail…use the crosswalk and the shortest route to the bridge (through the musuem arch) and enjoy the full view of the bridge and glass museum and if you want to learn about the history of washington….you could go there on a Thursday evening when it’s free to the public.

If the area was totally wide open, you would have idiots thinking they can drive their car across the bridge and collapse the plaza onto an auditorium full of kids.

I don’t think anybody’s arguing that the space needs to be wide open and empty. There are a lot of ways to allow people to pass through this area without making it look like a boulevard. Pocket Park? Absolutely. Donor Wall? Sure. However, why is it critical that the wall be solid and impassable?