Our Relationship With Water

Every now and then I see a post on Duke City Fox suggesting that some sort of riverfront promenade by built along the Rio Grande. Usually the San Antonio Riverwalk is cited in these discussions as a case example, another "wouldn't it be cool to have what they have?" Features like restaurants and shops perched on the river often pop up as possibilities in these discussions.

I've been formulating an opinion on this matter for quite a while now, and yesterday yet another post along these lines appeared on DCF, so I jumped into action. Although here the example used was Central Park in New York City, but the basic concept was the same.

Now, there are two main issues with this concept; one is environmental, while the other is more, I'll say "historical". First, the environmental:

The important thing to realize is that Bosque isn't really designed to serve as an urban park (although it does serve that function), it's designed more as a wildlife preserve; to preserve the environment that currently exists there. It's also one of the few remaining cottonwood forests of its type in the world, so naturally there is great sensitivity in this matter. Doing a landscape with grass lawns, floral gardens, and other non-native features just destroys the whole point of the Bosque.

Okay, so that's the practical, environmental take. But then there's my other point, the "historical":

I've been traveling a bit lately, and I've seen the waterfronts in San Francisco, San Diego, St. Louis, Chicago, New York City, and Pittsburgh in the last few years. Here's the thing though: those cities were built around their respective water features, be it the ocean or a river. There is a historical connection to their waterway; at one point, the entire well-being of the city relied on their connection via water to the rest of the world. Their economies were built on it - industry was constructed along the water; shipyards, factories, warehouses, ports, etc.

Once we hit globalization and these cities decide to go post-Industrial, the industry is torn down and the port functions moved elsewhere. All of a sudden, the desire to connect people to the river is an option, because the land is now available. And this connection makes sense; the city was built on the waterfront and the density is already there, so it offers open space to a large population and establishes that historical connection.

So how is Albuquerque different? Well, the city has never been organized around the Rio Grande. Neighborhoods like Los Duranes and Atrisco, remnants of the Spanish agriculture settlements in the valley, are organized around their acequias, but the Rio Grande was too wild and flooded too constantly to settle next to - settlements had to establish themselves just above the floodplain in order to thrive.

Then Albuquerque becomes established around man-made features - the railroad, then Route 66, then the freeways. This period is where most of the city's development took place. After sprawling outwards so much, development starts happening in relation to natural features again, but not to the river - instead, to the Sandia Mountains and the West Mesa, as people start desiring a space perched in the foothills or with a gorgeous view eastward across the valley. In some ways, we are more connected to the Sandia Mountains than to the river - we see it every day, we watch it change with the seasons and with the light of the setting sun, and it seems to watch over us. For crying out loud, we built a tramway to the top of it. The crest and the foothills are kind of like our own little promenade, where many of us go to for regular recreation.

The function of waterways in Albuquerque has never really been for economic or transportation purposes, like it has been in New York or Pittsburgh. The Rio Grande and the Bosque have served as a source of water (both a long time ago with agricultural settlements and much more recently with the San Juan-Chama diversion project), a flood buffer, and an obstacle to be bridged to allow further West Side development. The recreational aspect has been more a side benefit than the primary purpose.

So we have to be careful when we talk about doing riverfront promenades and such along the Rio Grande, because doing so just doesn't fit our historical association with the river. Not to say the Bosque couldn't use a little improvement - I'd love to see a few small boardwalks providing access to the river, where you can sit and watch the river and the wildlife, since river access currently is rather limited, but beyond that would be too much.