Cities 07

Jane Jacobs wrote extensively about the characteristics and use of sidewalks and how they affect the perceived quality of the surrounding area. To test some of Ms. Jacobs’ hypothesis, I chose an area near where I live which is used quite often: the Stone Arch Bridge, the park and apartments on the east side of the bridge, and the attractions surrounding the west side. I was lucky enough to observe this area before the snowfall so that use of the area was much heavier. Some of my observations agree with Ms. Jacobs, while some do not.

To start off, a description of the area is needed. The Stone Arch Bridge spans the Mississippi and is a historical railroad bridge that is magnificent in structure. It offers a beautiful view of St. Anthony Falls and connects the many attractions on one side (such as the Mill City Museum, the Metrodome, and the Guthrie) to the nearly exclusively residential area on the other side. On the residential side there is a public park which is also used frequently.

Overall the bridge is very beautiful and attracts people for that reason, which has various ramifications. This is consistent with Jacob’s theory that “If a cities streets [and sidewalks] look interesting, the city looks interesting”. Since the bridge is beautiful, people go to see it and walk it, which in turn attracts more people who now feel safe because of the number of strangers and watchful eyes around, which then attracts people watchers and loiterers, etc. This brings up another of Jacob’s thoughts that states that eyes must be on a sidewalk on a nearly constant basis to provide the illusion of safety. This is definitely evident on both sides of the bridge. On one side, a public park exists which (during the day) has people in it nearly constantly which provide eyes on that side to “police” and keep peace. On the other side, the Mill City Museum sits which has visitors daily that keep that side of the bridge occupied nearly constantly.

I chose the bridge because I noticed a single quality that in particular conflicts with Jacobs’ theories: there are (obviously) no stores, bars, restaurants, or other attractions other than the Mississippi along the bridge, yet during the day there seems to be a nearly constant flow of traffic (as long as weather permits). Granted, there are attractions near both ends of the bridge and maybe according to Jacobs different rules may apply to bridges, but overall people along the bridge seem happy to watch each other and “police” themselves without the need for constant watch from store owners. This proves that stores, bars, and restaurants are not completely necessary, as other factors like a beautiful view can attract enough people to make a walkway feel safe.

The park on the east end of the bridge requires consideration in regards to Jacobs as well. Near the park there is a huge apartment complex and the area can be considered residential. Just as in the residential parks Jacobs tells of, most of the users of the park are people from the nearby apartments who want their area to be safe. However, the bridge brings by a nearly constant flow of strangers, making the park clearly marked as public. Some of the strangers use the park while most do not. As I looked closer at this park, it began to appear almost as a “policing point” at one side of the bridge. The Stone Arch Apartment residents use the park the most due to proximity, and as they are proponents of a safe area to live in they are more likely to speak out when injustice is present in the area.

Overall, Jane Jacobs provided a nice hypothesis about public sidewalks, and many of her points were evident in the area I studied. Only the assertion that stores, bars, and restaurants are necessary for a safe sidewalk seemed to be questionable due to the nature of the bridge and the lack of any such attractions along it.
-Eric Tissot