In any given 24-hour period, the University District presents a paradox that has many city officials shaking their heads in frustration.
Broken windows, beer cans and piles of vomit have greeted U-District shop owners arriving early to open up - unwanted remnants of the rowdy midnight crowds that often orbit venues like Tommy's Nightclub near the northeast corner of Northeast 47th Street and University Way Northeast.
The discrepancy - it's night and day, literally - can be shocking to the uninitiated and frankly exasperating to neighborhood residents.
On some nights, the criminal activities occurring in the vicinity of Tommy's, which have included property damage and physical violence, belie the daytime image of a bustling college retail zone, with its music stores, coffee shops and vintage clothing boutiques.
Enforcement, however, presents some serious problems, not least of which is the issue of individual freedom vs. institutional responsibility. Is it right, much less possible, to require an establishment to police what goes on just outside its doors? Can you arrest someone just for hanging out and being loud?
As Seattle City Councilmember Sally Clark put it last week, "Unfortunately, we don't have a jackass license" (see June 6 issue).
BOOMING BUSINESS
Greater University Chamber of Commerce executive director Teresa Lord Hugel is acutely aware of the neighborhood disruptions occurring around certain late-night venues, though she rejects out-of-hand the idea that the University District has become an unsafe or unsavory place.
"It is a booming business [district] during the day," Hugel said, adding that the disturbances created in the vicinity of Tommy's are "intermittent" and limited to particular nights.
Nonetheless, she said, "Tommy's has not been a good neighbor, and they flaunt it. A lot of what they're doing is having a very negative experience for everyone else."
According to Hugel, the club does a poor job of cleaning up after itself, leaving a litter of "trash, vomit, cigarette butts" that presents a challenge for nearby businesses.
The volume of music coming from the club on particular nights is another thing altogether, she added: "The noise issue is beyond the pale. It's just not right for somebody to get away with that sort of behavior."
That said, Hugel admitted that she has problems with the idea of policing individual behavior, or even, as she said, "putting the onus back on the owner to do things properly."
She said she's not sure how she feels about the mayor's proposed nightclub legislation, which seeks to regulate nightlife through licensing and the creation of an advisory board that could make enforcement recommendations.
"This is a difficult, complicated issue," Hugel said. "I do have, on some level, problems with attempting to control the behavior of individuals in the public right-of-way. I do not think we've found a workable solution yet.... I don't believe adding bureaucracy is the way to go."
Hugel pointed out that she's not necessarily opposed to the kind of late-night events Tommy's hosts. The real problem, she said, is when the hosting establishment shows "no interest in crowd control or the safety of patrons."
Tommy's Nightclub & Grill did not respond to repeated requests for an interview.
MAINTAINING POLICE PRESENCE
Crowd control and patron safety are high on the priority list for Seattle Police Department (SPD) officers taking part in late-night patrols. According to SPD spokesperson Sean Whitcomb - who was involved in patrols for the North Precinct, including the University District, during the mid- to late-'90s - there are a variety of ways the department can respond to community complaints of unlawful behaviors like property damage and violence.
"One of the things we're going to do is ensure we're visible in an area," Whitcomb said, adding that "officers assigned to a particular sector may spend extra time patrolling" a trouble spot. Such discretionary patrols, as they are called, can never happen at the expense of other areas, he added.
Nonetheless, the idea in dealing with problem spots, Whitcomb said, "is to increase the amount of time that officers have" for discretionary patrols. This means patrolling a given area between calls and "getting out of the car and walking on foot, engaging the people in that area" - actions geared toward letting both patron and potential lawbreakers that police are in the area.
"Visibility is key," Whitcomb reiterated.[[In-content Ad]]
