To start the new year we have a reader submission from Bruce Jones. He and the Queen Anne Historical Society could use your help with this mystery photo. Is it Queen Anne? If not, where? Bruce writes:
This scanned image is part of a box of about 60 slides that are owned by the Queen Anne Historical Society. No one on the Board seemed to know where in Seattle the photo was taken–it appears to be about 1905 (all conjecture) and it seems to be Queen Anne, but is it? When it couldn’t be identified I asked a Board member if it would be ok to pass it your blog, and he said ok.
There is a small church at the back left that appears to be unique, and because the streets do not match at the corners, this is probably along a plat edge, but I can’t get it to match any early Sanborn maps of Queen Anne.
Perhaps your readers can help.
Regards,
Bruce Jones
There is a small church at the back left that appears to be unique, and because the streets do not match at the corners, this is probably along a plat edge, but I can’t get it to match any early Sanborn maps of Queen Anne.
Perhaps your readers can help.
Regards,
Bruce Jones
 |
| Possibly Queen Anne, Seattle, Washington. Photo courtesy Queen Anne Historical Society & Bruce Jones. |
How can that be Queen Anne if there’s a bigger hill behind it?
Are we sure it’s Seattle and not Portland?
Is there anyone who is smarter than me that can tell what direction this is from the long shadows of the telephones poles? I was thinking that this could be from Queen Anne looking east or looking at Queen Anne from the north. However I don’t think either of those are correct with the how the shadows are.
My guess is that, yes, this is Queen Anne, but looking towards the NORTH. The Fremont end of Phinney Ridge is directly behind in the center, sloping to the left toward Ballard, and to the right toward Wallingford. The hill behind and to the left of Phinney Ridge would be Crown Hill. The shadows look like this was taken in the afternoon, probably in the winter, owing to the lack of leaves on the deciduous tree at right front.
I think you are right Tom, the shadows suggest it is a northern view. I haven’t really spent any time looking the view from the north side of Queen Anne. Look at views from Google maps the topography seem to fit. ( I wasn’t able to find a single large view) I didn’t realize the Crown Hill was that tall.
This is definitely Queen Anne, looking north, and probably taken from the roof of a two story building, which alters the perspective of Crown Hill and Phinney Ridge behind it.
In the background to the right, one can see early Aurora and Stone Way wending their way northward towards up the hill toward what was left of Guy Phinney’s Estate — the relatively untouched forest to be seen at the crest of Phinney Ridge.
Keep in mind, in 1899 the city of Seattle passed a measure to purchase Guy Phinney’s Estate and Menagerie for $200,000 (Boondoggle! Preposterous! Do these damn Guv’mint folks think we are made of money?!?! And for a damn collection of exotic animals?), to create the Woodland Park Zoo, Woodland Park, and Green Lake Park. Thus, the trees at the top of the hill were left alone while the parks were laid out, which we can see in the photo, and would support the 1905-ish time frame.
Ballard and Crown Hill to the right in the photo were also well-established and thriving in this time frame, indeed Ballard was incorporated in and of itself, until annexing with Seattle in 1907.
Queen Anne is not taller than the other major hills in Seattle. It rises so preciptiously out of the bowl the downtown sits in, thanks to the Denny Regrade making Denny Hill go away, that it looks quite spectactular, but it’s shorter than High Point in West Seattle, Maple Leaf, and even Crown Hill, although not by much, and it’s roughly the same as Capitol Hill.
To get an elevtaed view north like this, the photographer had to be standing on top of the Queen Anne standpipe. If you go to Google street view, sure enough, the two houses seen in the center of the photo ar still on Garfield St.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=47.633062,-122.354742&spn=0,359.996572&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=47.633165,-122.355377&panoid=VPdZGfbbyuti6dQcvXS1Tg&cbp=12,22.07,,0,-0.63
Alan that was an outstanding bit of sleuthing.
Great find, Alan. Case closed!
Coincidentally, the Queen Anne standpipe is featured, with photos, currently on Paul Dorpat’s blog. http://pauldorpat.com/
Well it’s with a bit of embarrassment that this was solved so quickly. It seems that the houses weren’t built until after 1905 and as I searched for a match (also believing it must have been taken from the top of the standpipe), I was using the 1905 set of Sanborn maps!
As one can tell from older photos of the standpipe, you used to be able to go up a set of outside stairs to the top (until around 1937, I’ve heard). Here’s a link to a shot from 1929 with the stairs…
http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~archives/photos/32/400/3207.gif
I’ve read that it was closed as it was quite dangerous at the top with such a low wall. Judge for yourself from 1906…
http://content.lib.washington.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/warner&CISOPTR=254&CISOBOX=1&REC=8
A few years ago I was pleased to be able to chat at length about Queen Anne with a former resident who grew up on the hill in the 20′s and 30′s. About that time the city was celebrating some anniversary of the standpipe (before they tore it down) and I asked her if she would be interested in speaking to the attendees about her experiences associated with the water tower. Her reply was along the lines of “it was just a makeout spot, not much else to tell about it.”
Thanks to everyone…
And a big round of applause to the VintageSeattleites! Most impressive!
Outstanding! That was exciting!
@Louis, who you callin’ vintage, vintage.