Fig 1: Historic District (H. Tieben 2011)

Heritage Preservation as a Process: Pike Place Market and America’s first Preservation & Development Authority Hendrik Tieben School of Architecture, The Chinese University of Hong Kong

In 2006, Hong Kong experienced a heated heritage debate related to the demolition of Lee Tung Street, Star Ferry and Queens Pier. Two years later, with the Urban Renewal Strategy Review and the initiative ―Conserving Central‖ HKSAR Government made important steps to respond to the growing community concerns. Since then the focus of the debate shifted to the questions: how to balance preservation and development; and how to conserve buildings not just as physical shells but in connection with the surrounding community life. The following paper presents the case of the ‘s Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority (PDA) which, although dating back to the 1960-70s, provides an example that might inspire the current debate in Hong Kong. Created in 1973, the Pike Place Market PDA was the first such authority in the USA. Since then, it was able to keep the market district as a vibrant centre of Seattle‘s Downtown and make it one of the most important tourist destinations in the Washington State. The PDA was created as a result of a citizen protest against an urban renewal project which had been proposed by members of the downtown business community and backed by the City Government and would have destroyed the entire market area. As it even extends its influence to the more renowned examples of the preservation movement in New York, the case has been regarded as the precursor of new environmental politics (Sanders, 2010). The link of heritage preservation with an ecological food movement could make it an interesting model for Hong Kong where the debate of heritage preservation could easily be linked with a much broader social and ecological agenda. It is also an example of how in an important historical phase a crucial decision was made between two competing visions. Instead of following the earlier plans to develop further traffic infrastructures and shopping malls, the city moved to the investment in social justice and ecological food provision. Moreover the case shows how heritage preservation is a long enduring but rewarding process if it is approached with a genuine commitment.

A short history of Pike Place Market The entire area of Pike Place Market Historic District covers nine acres of land in Seattle‘s Downtown. On its website it is introduced: ―[…] more than a century of operation encompass thousands of fascinating stories — tales of immigration, internment, renovation and urban renewal — all that help explain why Pike Place Market is called ‗The Soul of Seattle.‘‖ Today, it is recognized as America's premier farmers' market, with more than 200 year-round commercial businesses, and 190 craftspeople and 100 farmers renting tables on daily basis; in addition there are 240 street performers, and more than 300 apartment units, most of which for low-income elderly people (www.pikeplacemarket.org). Although most people might associate Pike Place Market with the preservation movement of the 1960s, it was connected to citizen activism since its beginning. It was founded between 1907 and 1908, when in the city the price of onions increased ten-fold and consumers and farmers were equally upset by the wholesalers who gained high profits at their costs. In response to the public anger, Seattle City Councilman Thomas Revelle proposed a public street market connecting farmers directly to the consumers. The street market was an immediate success and by the end of 1907, the first permanent market building opened. Since the 1940s, however, problems accumulated and led to its dilapidated state in the early 1960s. The first challenge came 1942 with the decision to intern all Japanese-Americans during World War II, as most of Seattle‘s farmers belonged to the large local Japanese community. The next challenge was the fast expansion of Seattle‘s industrial sector (in particular Boeing) which transformed large areas of farmland into factories, and was followed by residential suburbanization. At the same time, the growing use of refrigerators allowed food to be stored for much longer and led to the proliferation of supermarkets. Thus, increasingly the market lost its central role as the food supplier of the urban population. Furthermore, the social geography in the city changed with high and middle income groups moving to the suburbs, which even more reduced the business of the market. Similar changes occurred in many western cities and also partly in Hong Kong which has several impressive market buildings from the first part of the 20th century. After losing parts of their business and with ever-increasing land prices, they became - like in Seattle – potential sites for urban renewal projects. In 1963, inspired by the progressive atmosphere of the 1962 World Fair (which brought Seattle its famous Space Needle and Monorail), and encouraged by the availability of federal funds for urban renewal, members of Seattle‘s downtown business community proposed to replace the market and its surrounding with the ―Pike Place Redevelopment Scheme‖. The scheme included a shopping mall, a hotel, an apartment building, four office buildings, a hockey arena, and a parking garage. It was intended to breathe new life into the Downtown by bringing back high and middle income shoppers, and to offer them a similar convenience to the suburban malls. However, the plans faced immediate opposition. The protesters were inspired by the paintings of , who just had shown in a Seattle museum his works which presented the bustling grass roots life in the market. Another influential activist was architect and professor . In his sketchbooks Seattle Cityscape 1&2 he presented the city‘s spaces with their human activities. In his Market Sketchbook he gave in addition short snapshots about the fascinating life stories of the people selling in the market (Steinbrueck, 1996). They revealed their impressive language skills, which were related to their migration background and made them perfect communicators with all kinds of customers. Similar sketches of street scenes in Hong Kong were drawn and published by urban designer Peter Cookson Smith in 2006 as a critique of the local urban renewal practice (Smith, 2006). Although Victor Steinbrueck admitted the market district was in a dilapidated condition, he and the activist group ―Friends of the Market‖ underlined its importance as a place where different social groups could mingle. In addition, the heritage and social debate expanded now to the issue of ecological food production, which was related to a newly formed ―anti-supermarket‖ movement (Sanders, 2010). Pike Place Market was the perfect counter example as it provided daily fresh food directly from the producer. This was facilitated by its location near the harbor front allowing the easy transport from Seattle‘s surrounding islands. This initial quality of the market now gained new currency, once prepackaged food had became the daily experience. The ecological argument received more support, due to the growing criticism of the scale in which valuable farmland was scarified for the expansion of generic suburbs. In 1969, the city started to respond to the protests in a climate of the nationwide civil rights protests and a growing domestic crisis in the manufacturing industry. In a moment of social tension and a shrinking public budget it seemed even more questionable to use public funds to bulldoze the highly popular market. The size of the area was eventually defined when the market district became officially a historic preservation zone. This happened by initiative measure at the municipal general election in November 1971 when the citizens of Seattle voted to preserve the character of the Market for all time. But this decision was only the start of the work. The now pressing questions were how the dilapidated structures and the declined business should be improved. This was a particular challenge as the main aim was to keep intact the low income social fabric which had been the most important motivation behind the protest for the protection of the market.

The Establishment of the Pike Place Market PDA The Pike Place Market Preservation & Development Authority (PDA) was then created in 1973 as a not-for-profit public corporation chartered by the City of Seattle with the aim to manage the properties in the Historic District. Its Council has 12 voluntary members, four appointed by the Mayor, four elected by the Constituency, and four appointed by the PDA Council. The PDA‘s public purpose is expressed in its Charter. The Pike Place Market Constituency exercises the public's oversight of Pike Place Market under 1973 charter provisions which created the Pike Place Market Historic District and Pike Place Market Preservation & Development Authority (PDA). ―Pike Place Public Market Historic District‖ is listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. The PDA has since the central role to make the market vibrant and financially viable without compromising its social and heritage value. To insure this, it has to act in accordance to the detailed Guidelines of the Pike Place Market Historic Commission. Both have to find ways how to balance preservation and development.

Fig 2: Different Programmatic Zones of the Market (From: Pike Place Market Historical Commission Revised Guidelines, Sept. 22, 2010)

Objectives defining to whom the PDA should benefit What make the Pike Place Market PDA special are its range of objectives: ―It is required to preserve, rehabilitate and protect the Market's buildings; increase opportunities for farm and food retailing in the Market; incubate and support small and marginal businesses; and provide services for low-income people.‖ Right from the beginning, these objectives gave a key importance to negotiation between the different goals, as the economic viability had to be constantly balanced with the overall social mission.

Investing in the social fabric In 1982, the Market Foundation was established to support the services for low- income people, including a clinic, a senior center, a food bank and a child care & preschool. The Foundation also supports the Market's heritage programs, public improvements and repairs to the Market's historic buildings, development of new low-income housing in the Market, and programs that assist the Market's farmers. It serves the Market and the larger communities by: (1) providing Market Fresh Coupons to low-income Market residents; (2) connecting Seattle food banks and meal programs, a volunteer program that distributes the Market's unsold products; (3) maintaining the Farmer Relief Fund to help farmers when emergencies strike; (4) supporting low-income housing programs both at the Market and throughout Downtown Seattle; and (5) funding essential services for the frail and elderly, including advocacy and development (PikePlaceMarketFoundation.org).

Fig 3: Victor Steinbruek Park at the northern end of the Market (H. Tieben 2011)

Importance of Urban Design A key part making the market successful was an initial urban design study organized by PDA under George Rolfe. The results revealed that the existing traffic regulations made it difficult for drivers to find available parking spots when driving through the market street; once reaching the next bigger street it became a frustrating endeavor to try returning to the market for another attempt. Although this was a relatively trivial issue, it had a strong negative impact on the business in the market; and the situation improved significantly as soon as the traffic direction was changed. When the PDA decided to add a new parking structure, one of the important directives was to prevent blocking of the grand views from the market to the wide water landscape of the Puget Sound. Due to the clear objectives, guidelines and concrete influence, the PDA was able to develop the project to the benefit of the larger whole: The parking structure was constructed on the slop and stayed so low that on its top a pleasant open space could be created (), which works as perfect match to the market, as it allows customers to eat the just purchased snacks, lying on the green grass and enjoying the splendid view on the harbor and sea. Strong emphasis was also given to the improvement of the pedestrian connections from the Downtown on the higher plateau, through the market and down to the waterfront.

Strict regulations based on the main objectives In Hong Kong, we are aware that luxurious shopping malls adhere to strict rules to construct their particular image. These can cover everything from the design of shop windows and entrances, to the smell and sounds in the conditioned air, to the dress and hairstyle of employees. It is interesting to compare these rules with the equally tight regulations of Pike Place Market, which were similarly crucial in making the market unique in its own way. The Market is known for its highly colorful mix of farmers, craftsmen, hawkers, and performers; it is also well known for its individual and fresh products. However, less known is that this was not achieved in a spontaneous or informal process. The many implemented rules were so created in order to protect a maximum of diversity and quality. This made the experience of the market substantially different from other places which embrace similar market themes, but are filled with a generic chain and souvenir shops, or expensive global brand stores (e.g. Hong Kong‘s Western Market and Heritage 1881). In contrast, in Pike Place Market chain stores or franchises are categorically forbidden (with one exception to be mentioned below). The Pike Place Market Historical Commission regulates many daily aspects of the market and its Guidelines are thus worth reading. Many important issues are addressed. The study here will take a closer look at the issue of public seating due to its importance for social accessibility and its common lack in Hong Kong‘s heritage projects (especially at Heritage 1881). If public seating is to be integrated there are important aspects which have to be considered such as visitor flows, as well as safety and security concerns. Pike Place Market Historical Commission balances what is desirable and achievable: ―(3.8.10) Public seating is a desired amenity for visitors to the Market. Plants and flowers add color and appeal and are also a desired amenity. Litter receptacles of uniform design should be provided throughout the District. However, public seating, flowers, litter receptacles and other amenities should be balanced against the need for pedestrian movement and accessibility. Removal or elimination of such amenities is discouraged […]. What helped to fine adjust the rules of the Market and to easily monitor them was the existence or creation of associations representing the Merchants, Daystall Tenants, and Street Performers. So for instance the Pike Market Performers Guild can negotiate with the PDA and the Pike Place Market Historical Commission to push for relevant interests of its members but they also need to respect others who work and live in the historic district. Again there is a productive attention on how a balance between rights and rules is achieved: Buskers keep their flexibility to decide when and where to perform, but they need to respect time limits (when other performers are waiting); and there is a ban on electronic amplification, brass instruments or drums which likely would disturb others. By giving responsibilities to the associations, they can inform the rules with their practical experience but also can be made accountable. Much more important and in contrast to pure management firms, they have their own interest in becoming proactive agents, organizing their own websites, newspapers and festivals and thus making important contributions to the vibrancy of the place.

High degree of attention to detail After its inception, the PDA organized the restoration and renovation of all historic buildings on the basis of the original plans and blueprints with attention to the used materials. The restoration and maintenance was not an easy task as it is likely to lose the original ambiance and compromise the main objectives. The upgrade of the buildings to modern standards of fire proof, indoor climate, hygiene, universal accessibility and energy efficiency placed heavy demand on the architects and construction firms, and required so sensitive an execution that it however remained invisible to most visitors. Several of the existing buildings are relatively humble functionalist constructions lacking the simple elegance of Hong Kong‘s modernist markets from the 1930s. They nevertheless were treated with upmost attention to detail. This was only possible, as most involved firms identified themselves with the social program of the market, and were proud to spend extra time to search for non-standard solutions which unexpectedly gave them a certain bonus within Seattle‘s community. The not-for–profit engagement of many participants would have been immediately questioned if the PDA had compromised the original objectives. This made it crucial that all discussions of the PDA and the other associations and foundations of the Market are posted for public review on the internet.

Fig 4: Pike Place Market (K.H. Tieben 2011)

Challenges on the way The PDA, with its various renovation and development projects, shared the fate of most big endeavors: it ran over budget at different times. Since 1973, there were different experiments to secure its budget. In the beginning of the 1980s, when the PDA became unable to refinance its own buildings to get access to their growing equity, it paired with the Urban Group, a New York City-based venture capitalists group. However this public-private partnership began soon to create problems, when the Urban Group demanded from the PDA to raise rents to gain higher returns (Griffey & MacIntosh, 2004). Now it was Victor Steinbrueck's son Peter who organized new protests to defend the original objectives. Eventually the state had to support the Market in a costly settlement. Already during the time when the PDA partnered with the Urban Group, the Market Foundation began to seek private funds for the support of its low-income community and for the ongoing capital needs of the district. Since then, the Foundation has conducted private donation campaigns. By the 1990s, the Market could achieve a relatively stable financial standing. Due to its complex world and mission of the market, there are constant possibilities for conflicts. One of the important challenges is that merchants and craftsmen generally profit more from tourists than farmers do as they mainly cater for the local residents. With the increasing visitor number some of the farmers felt being under pressure. In this situation, the PDA had to find ways to guarantee the further provision of a broad range of fresh food items even though some of them sold less than others. The overall success of the market eventually was bound to the capacity to defend its diversity and authenticity. The many groups and individuals, who - often voluntary - contributed to the project and had to be subordinated under the strict rules, shared the belief that the market‘s success has to come from its relevance to the local community, and that it is this relevance which makes it also an unique attraction for visitors.

Further effects The PDA regenerated Pike Place Market and succeeded in keeping it as an accessible place to all income groups. Thus the project made a contribution to balance the society in a time of growing social polarization. A 2004 economic analysis quantified the district's net benefits to Seattle and the region (Griffey & MacIntosh, 2004). It showed that the Market properties produced gross revenues of US$86.8 million in 2002. The same year, sales at the Market generated nearly US$3.9 million in tax revenue including US$3.3 million in sales tax, US$500,000 in business and operations taxes and more than US$100,000 in utility taxes. The study also underlined the Market's role as an employment center, supporting 1,500 jobs in winter and up to 2,400 jobs in summer. It serves 20,000 residents living within walking distance (Griffey & MacIntosh, 2004). As the city provides free public transport in the Downtown area even more people can reach the Market with a free bus ride. In addition the popular market was chosen as the scenery of several highly successful movie productions, which further added to its attractiveness and that of the city. In the last decades, property developers started to become active just outside of the historic market district as to profit from the attractive destination. A series of new high rise developments for hotels, offices and condominiums were erected with various successes. This has increased gentrification but also kept Seattle‘s Downtown more vibrant than other downtowns in the USA. Another important effect of the market was the general increase of interest in better food quality and in urban farming. In the following years most other neighborhoods in Seattle organized their own framers‘ markets which increased significantly the livability and community sense in those areas and the city as a whole.

Lessons for Hong Kong It is not easy to draw direct consequences from one place to another especially if they are located in very different contexts. However, several points might be worth considering: The biggest difference to the heritage projects in Hong Kong are that Pike Place Market project is based on the PDA‘s explicit social objectives and the way they were followed up with commitment and strict rules (for instance even the change from selling fresh juice to a prepackaged product with the same content requires an approval). But this effort makes Pike Place Market a strikingly different experience to the many other places which also use market themes. It is one of Hong Kong‘s eccentricities that it attempts so persistently to eliminate its vibrant street markets, when other cities invest in farmers‘ markets which can provide without high investment (potentially) more healthy diets, better social integration and community sense, opportunities for small and marginal businesses and high attractions for visitors. After the erosion of trust in Seattle‘s City Government due to the urban renewal projects of the 1960s, it had to regain this trust from the community which suspected it of acting mainly in the interest of the local business elites. In the difficult time of the early 1970s, the Pike Place Market PDA, as a highly committed non-for-profit agency, was able to rebuild trust and gain public support. Some of the city‘s most vocal activists were taken on board and the PDA provided real opportunities to let them achieve their aims. Seattle, as most cities, is not free from not-in-my-backyard attitudes and influences of powerful corporations; however with Pike Place Market, it was able to make a significant step towards social justice and ecological awareness. With this initiative, it shifted its earlier goals from the celebration of high-tech infrastructures, so prominent at the 1962 World Fair, towards nurturing a better social fabric. This interestingly did not preclude the emergence of new innovative and successful corporations, which learned quickly from the shifts in values and lifestyles, such as Starbucks, which started in 1971 its first business in Pike Place Market. In Hong Kong, the highly compromised heritage projects (e.g. Western Market and especially 1881 Heritage) made critical community members suspicious. Urban renewal projects such as in the Wedding Card Street (Lee Tung Street), which substituted long established and successful businesses with a generic wedding theme will unlikely raise Hong Kong‘s international competitiveness, once visitors are familiar with committed approaches in other places. Moreover, they exclude from the beginning the interest in voluntary participation, which was the strongest force to make Pike Place Market so unique and successful over 38 years. With Hong Kong‘s increasing social imbalance and the economic vulnerability of its middle and lower income groups, projects which are socially inclusive are even more important than in the past. Seattle‘s PDA is an example in which committed citizens fought successfully for the chance of such an experiment, and despite the challenges, and due to its strict rules, it has became a successful destination, reasonably financially viable, and could provide an impressive range of social services. This is a high achievement, especially when compared with the questionable outcome of Hong Kong‘s high investments in media campaigns and financial adventures such as Disneyland which, despite a global brand name, billions of public money, massive land reclamation in a sensitive natural site, and best global connectivity, was not able to attract even half the visitor number of Pike Place Market. It would be a fascinating experiment to create in Hong Kong a Gage and Peel Street Markets PDA, with similar strict rules and quality controls, upgrading the surrounding with integrated social programs and housing for the existing low income elderly residents, and to witness then the achieved community benefits and the attractiveness for a new generation of visitors which no longer travels in tour buses but explores food websites like Open Rice, spending time and money scouting for the most hidden local food specialty, and immediately post their ranking on multiple social network sites.

References Griffey, Trevor & MacIntosh, Heather (2004) Sustaining Pike Place Market. In Historic Seattle’s Online Monthly Preservation Magazine, June/July 2004. Sanders, Jeffrey Craig (2010) Seattle & The Roots of Urban Sustainability. Inventing Ecotopia (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press). Smith, Peter Cookson (2006) The Urban Design of Impermanence: Streets, Places and Spaces in Hong Kong (Hong Kong: MCCM Creations). Steinbrueck, Victor (1996) Market Sketchbook (Seattle & London: University of Washington Press).

More on Pike Place Market: www.pikeplacemarket.org http://ppmconstituency.org www.PikePlaceMarketFoundation.org www.pikemarketbuskers.org www.cityofseattle.net/neighborhoods/preservation/pikeplace_history.htm www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/preservation/pikeplace_guidelines.pdf