City officials and Chihuly backers were early partners
As the city solicits other ideas, newly-released emails show behind-the-scenes backing and ambitious plans for a Chihuly glass museum at Seattle Center.
By Michele Matassa Flores
April 28, 2010.
Last fall, months before the public learned of plans for a Dale Chihuly glass museum at Seattle Center, backers were laying out an ambitious design and timeline, including an outdoor "hot shop" for blowing glass and an opening date of May/June 2010 — about a month from now.
That timeline, evident in documents just released by the Seattle Center, seems wildly optimistic now, as criticism of the proposal has led the city to back up several steps and call for alternative proposals. Ideas must be submitted by June 4 then will be vetted by a review panel.
For much of last year, the Chihuly plan for replacing the existing Fun Forest kiddie carnival at the Center was the only proposal under consideration. And in fact, proponents of the plan had immediate, unwavering support and even assistance from city officials. That comes through clearly in emails between the officials and the proponents, which include the Wright family, owners of the Space Needle; Chihuly Studios; and architecture and design firms hired to help them. The city released the emails in response to a public records request by Crosscut.
Seattle Center redevelopment director Jill Crary was sold on the Chihuly museum idea early on. In an email describing a Nov. 5 presentation (during the administration of then-Mayor Greg Nickels) to the Seattle Design Commission, she told two city colleagues and a Space Needle consultant: "I thought it went very well. It was important to get buy-in for the concept — that's our first public stamp of approval and no small thing. I'm not sure we helped or hurt ourselves showing actual schemes and I'm not sure right now what our next presentation to them needs to be — we may have to go back with actual 'concept design' and not jump to schematic design."
Crary also acknowledged the museum would be a diversion from the Seattle Center Master Plan, which encourages open space: "…given that this was the first vetting of something different from the master plan, that has had no other public vetting ... they didn't read about it in the paper or hear about it from legislation, we made a good start."
Delays in the project actually started late last fall, when the Design Commission (referred to in some emails as "DC") requested adjustments to the project. Amy Worthington of the Seneca Group, a real estate consulting firm working on the project, wrote on Nov. 9: "I agree that we will need to still go back to DC with our concept design. However, I am concerned about that happening in January instead of December. I know we had targeted 12/17. Is there ANY way the DC would be willing to meet that day?"
Nearly three months later, in late January, Seattle Center director Robert Nellams met with brand-new Mayor Mike McGinn to present the plans. "My meeting went VERY well yesterday," Nellams wrote to Space Needle CEO Ron Sevart, Chairman Jeff Wright, and Crary. "I now have the support I need to move forward with you. The only 'issues' that came up were references to the perception of elitism and/or stepping away from the egalitarian nature of the Center that this project may invoke. We will counter those concerns with clear public benefits and significant new revenue for the Center."
Nellams, asked yesterday (April 27) about the emails, said he and his staff began working with the Chihuly team only after getting the go-ahead from then-Mayor Nickels in July and the City Council in September. It was his call, Nellams said, to move forward without issuing a Request for Proposals — in large part because an RFP for the northern part of the Fun Forest had generated very little interest.
Stressing that the Center staff was negotiating lease rates and other terms as it worked on the Chihuly design, Nellams said the project was never considered a done deal. In addition, he said, his staff offered assistance in the best interest of the city. For example, they insisted the design be changed to allow better public access on both the northern and southern ends of the museum site, addressing a concern raised by the Design Commission.
In a Feb. 10 email to Wright that included project details, Nellams alluded to those changes. "I would like to address your attention to the Public Benefits section," he wrote, "as it lays out the things I believe we agreed to or are necessary to get the deal approved by the Council. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Peace."
Comments:
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 8:20 a.m. Inappropriate
This makes me wonder if there are any other Nickels timebombs ticking away. Good thing McGinn has been cleaning house at City Hall.
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 10:10 a.m. Inappropriate
"…given that this was the first vetting of something different from the master plan, that has had no other public vetting ... they didn't read about it in the paper or hear about it from legislation, we made a good start."
This is Newspeak for "You Seattle park users are going to eat it and you're going to like it."
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 10:44 a.m. Inappropriate
But will there be a Bubblator?
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 11:50 a.m. Inappropriate
The issue here is essentially the same as what took Nickels down. The economic crisis has created a perception in the citizenry that our government at the national level has become beholden to business interests. I doubt that there are many people that would disagree with the statement that Goldman-Sachs or Bank of America control federal regulatory policy.
Similarly here in Seattle, the voters perceived that the Mayor's office had become too tight with business--development of south Lake Union and the on-going issues with its zoning, for example. Similarly, with the Sonics leaving Key Arena after substantial investment the voters have seen that previous public financing on behalf of business interests have not gone well. They are sceptical and rightly so.
Nickels defeat symbolized the change in the voters' perceptions. The backroom deals which are coming to light serve only to re-inforce voter perceptions of elected officials who are not listening to them. Furthermore, the actions of the tourism industry to pack the hearings on the Chihuly museum only further this perception as an inside-deal.
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 2:33 p.m. Inappropriate
Calm down, Pythagoras! This story has less to do with back room deals than with a shortage of public support for the Center. Here's how I see the context.
The Center has long understood that drawing $10-13 million a year from the general fund as a subsidy was getting it in trouble at city hall. So it launched a planning process to make the case for a special levy of $150 million or so to fix up Center House; in turn, rents could be raised there and the annual shortfall might be reduced. To make the case for the levy, the Center did a master plan, and all kinds of other needs got put onto the wish list. Then Virginia Anderson, a master fundraiser, departed (she and Mayor Nickels were oil and water), and the Nickels administration decided to postpone the special levy, putting the Pike Market levy and passing Sound Transit 2 ahead of the Center. Mayor McGinn seems to have even less appetite for such a levy.
All along, the problem has been that the Center does not poll well in terms of passing a levy. So the Center administration had little recourse but to look for commercial partners, urged on by the city council and the mayor's office. And those partners had better be able to pay some big bills and foot capital costs, as is the case with the Space Needle and its Chihuly museum project - and as with EMP and the Opera and the Sonics before them.
It's us citizens who could and should change this pattern of forced commercialization, but voters need to be given a compelling public vision for the Center, one they would support in a levy or with voluntary donations from the nearby neighborhoods (as with many parks conservancies around the country). Fortunately, folks are working to put that together. Until we do, it will be more insider deals, public outrage, and a downward spiral at the Center we all profess to love but do too little to fix.
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 4:09 p.m. Inappropriate
"downward spiral"?
More like a vicious circle--levies (capital bonds too) put together with no thought of maintenance NG!
From what the departing Parks guy said, this problem is far from limited to the Seattle Center--its the rule.
Freeways, light rail, SLUT—— the works.
Ever cracked the pages of the World Without Us?
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 5:14 p.m. Inappropriate
The Center has been moving upward in the past 15 years or so, not downward. I'm not saying the future will be the same...
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 5:25 p.m. Inappropriate
That is interesting logic that there needed to be an expenditure of $150 million in order that the annual expenditure of $10-13 million "might" be reduced!
But it came out of someone else's turf, not city hall, so it was a good idea.
Wow, I guess this is really an education in how the city works.
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 6:51 p.m. Inappropriate
The design for the Chiluly museum thing is ludicrous. Visitors arrive at the space needle circle drive and are directed via the covered walkway to the Chiluly entry as if it's the most important attraction.
I noticed this: "the design (should) be changed to allow better public access on both the northern and southern ends of the museum site." I may be the only Crosscut regular who brought up this concern, but it caught the attention of Seattle design czars.
The old Fun Warehouse building should be razed, IMO, and any new building constructed on a much smaller foundation to improve the mentioned public access and I must add 'visibility'. Visibility between north and south Fun Forest acres is also a problem that can only be rectified by moving the monorail station; thus, my Circulator Monorail proposal for a new all-weather station beneath Thomas roadway still makes sense.
Consider building up 3 or 4 stories, just tall enough for many attractions, venues, a Chiluly gallery, and a bubbleator. Find another design for the Center House remodel. The current design proposal is extravagent and ludicrous to leave the south side open like a shed.
Posted Wed, Apr 28, 11:20 p.m. Inappropriate
Parting out the grounds to single bidders championed by people that claim to be trying to get more revenue is kind of sad. It is as if the Space Needle is the only entity that would be interested to develop a space on public property at the base of the Space Needle.
Are they that stupid? No, I just don't think they have citizens in mind as much as they do the "elitists" they lobbied on behalf of on the public's dime.
Maybe the people inside are too close to be objectives of increasing revenue while executing the master plan.
It appears to me that the "Next Fifty" effort looks like an effort to redu the master plan, reducing the dozens of pages to a flashcard/word cloud of excitement. Celebrating urban blight, as I mentioned here about a year ago on the 50th effort (I know you all print and frame every word people post), is what the center has to celebrate.
I think that the enclosed spaces, where possible, should be turned over to the new Public Facilities District that is in charge of the convention center. They are so good at generating revenue that the state was stealing from them. Managing, marketing, and developing our enclosed spaces in a vacuum is just not working out for me. I think somebody else can do this better, without sharing a snuggie with the Wrights. We should limit the amount of enclosed spaces on the site, and maximize the enclosed spaces and their footprints.
I know I am proposing to give up direct control of those spaces, but it is too a shared entity whose reason for being is all about getting the most public benefit out of publicly owned space.
Posted Tue, May 4, 1:11 p.m. Inappropriate
Just a clarification, Mr. Baker. The Next Fifty, the 50th anniversary of the Seattle World's Fair, is exactly that. It is not a renewed process for updating the Century 21 Master Plan for Seattle Center. Check out the website www.thenextfifty.org.
Posted Thu, May 6, 5:01 p.m. Inappropriate
Boycott the Space Needle. The message is simple – no loss of planned open space at Seattle Center.
http://lightandair.wordpress.com/
Posted Tue, May 25, 8:36 p.m. Inappropriate
A group of civic leaders is being assembled to submit a response to the Seattle Center RFP to be free public green space at Seattle Center rather than the proposed Chihuly private commercial exhibit. We urge you to sign the following petition by June 3, 11:55 p.m. to add your voice of support to this effort:http://www.PetitionOnline.com/Cntury21/petition.html