Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Is Reichert for Repealing the ... | Everything's Faster in Texas »

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

End Station

Posted by on May 30 at 14:18 PM

Last year, I edited an issue of the local architectural journal Arcade that was devoted to the future possibilities of the three old stations inside of the three big cities of our region—Seattle, Vancouver, and Portland. At that time, I supported the remodeling (or unmodeling) project that’s still, ever so slowly, in progress. For those who don’t know about it, this is more or less the story: forty or so years ago, in an effort to make the old station look modern, architects covered up its Italianate decorations and moldings. Ten or so years ago, with the rebirth of the station (primarily due to increased rail traffic between Seattle and Portland), a project to undo what the modernists had done to the station’s interiors was started. Though I favor modernist architecture to the revivalist architecture that began in the 19th century and finally died in the 1920s, covering up the problem at King Street Station was a bad idea—the architectural equivalent of sweeping a mess under a rug. It’s much better for a building to be what is rather than what it is not.

This weekend, an article about the new train station in Berlin (which is now the biggest station in Europe) changed my position on King Street Station. We should stop re/unmodeling it, tear the whole thing down, and build a station that’s as bold as the one in Berlin:
Berlin Central Station.jpg

Seattle must stop fussing over old buildings; let them go, let them die, and focus on the new, the future ahead. Leave Portland and Tacoma to do all the preservation and historic stuff.

KSS_waitingroomlarge.jpg


Uncovering the past, as the contractors are presently doing in KSS, is ultimately meaningless because Seattle doesn’t have a past. We only own the future—even if the idea of a future is an illusion (more on this at another time).


CommentsRSS icon

We'll never become a "world class" city unless we tear down the whole damn thing!

And build a monorail!

Fuck right off. Seattle has a wonderful past well worth preserving, and I look forward to the day when the Stranger is but a distant memory in it.

Gimme a break. Comparing Europe's use of trains and their stations to Seattle's is ridiculous. The current King Street Station is a piss-filled crap hole. This retro-model will be a vast improvement and a good reflection of how far behind the curve this country is in transportation infrastructure.


Are you out of your mind? Restoring it is a much better use of time/energy/resources.

They're not exactly all-future in Europe, either. Many train stations in Germany, for instance, have been modded over the decades, so at the main station in Frankfurt for instance you've got a classical facade with an industrial futurist interior from the 20's, and 1970's subway terminals straight out of a Kubrick film. It's only in places like Berlin and Holland where they are building these things because, well, they got the living shit bombed out of them 60 years ago and this opened up some real estate for them where they didn't have any old buildings to renovate. I'm more attracted to old buildings that are modernized repeatedly over the years and become almost living organisms which are adapted to changing times and don't belong completely to any single time. Berlin's had its share of architectural fiasco too - compare for instance the new Reichstag (which is awesome) to the new Kanzlerei (which is atrocious).

It's not an either/or situation. Some constructive reuses/restorations of stations (Washington DC probably being the best US example) are undoubtedly the right choice.

Conversely, for a horrible example of tearing down/building new, just look at NYC's Penn Station. While the orginal Pennsylvania Station was doomed to fail, the redesigned station has both aesthetic and operational shortcomings.

King Street is unique, not only in its architecture, but also it's purpose: It is a terminal for two long-distance trains, and a base for the expanding regional Cascades service. It's somewhat clumsy layout is a result of it's original design (public areas on the King Street level, administrative functions on the Jackson Street level) but the renovation plans call for integrating the two spaces into one, since there are no longer railroad offices in the structure.

Most importantly, the renovation work is not just "uncovering the past". It will reinforce the building seismically, and remove the dangerous false ceiling in the waiting room (better to have chunks of plaster fall on you in a quake than the sharp-edged metal ceiling tiles that in place currently)

But this is a theoretical conversation at best: The building is protected as a landmark, and will soon be owned by the City of Seattle. Barring a disaster, there is no possibility of demolition.

If you want to talk new, talk about the Tukwilla Station, and it's potential as a transfer point between Sound Transit, Amtrak, and Sea-Tac.

Historical buildings, such as the King Street Station, keep both time and place in perspective. When it was built back in Aught 6 a century ago it was bold and modern. It is a quaint 20th century notion to think that everying modern is better and good in and of itself. It is disturbing to say the least to say everything would be so much better if we just bulldozed history.
Are there any Seattle natives on the staff of the Stranger? Do any of them care or give a damn about good old skid row?

I love the King Street Station, and I'm all for restoring it... for what it's worth. And hey: We're for density, in-fill, mass transit. We're not for leveling the place. And I happen to think the station is/was beautiful. You're wrong on this one, Charles. Berlin got to build a big new train station because the big old one was probably bombed flat in WWII and not needed/replaced until after unification.

Brad Steinbacher—editorial's #2—is a Seattle native. So is Eli Sanders, Annie Wagner, and Megan Seling (well, suburbs for Megan). And that's just editorial—and just the ones I can think of. There are probably more on edit...

Oh, and speaking of where you're from... I'm from Chicago, where the biggest tragedy of my childhood—er, one of them—was the day they tore down the old downtown Northwestern Railroad station. The bastards.

FWIW, the progress on the station has progressed beyond what is shown in the picture (which is taken from the State's website. They really should update that)

The entry now has all of the plaster restored, and the original chandelier in place. Fabrications of the original wall sconces are also in place. It looks really nice.

Outside, the canopies have been replaced. Once the city takes possession, the brick gets cleaned, a new roof goes on, the exterior "grand staircase" gets restored, and the clock gets fixed.

Once all that is done, the ticket counter moves to the old restaurant and - finally - the fake ceiling comes out.

Of course, by that time, the Bush Administration will probably have killed Amtrak.


You know, if it just gave us high speed passenger rail that goes more than 200 mph like they have in Europe, I don't really care what the rail station looks like.

They can make it look like the EMP for all I care.

But a monorail would be nice.

or at least doubled local bus service in all of Seattle.

Seriously Chuck, get a grip. If the station in Portland is any indication of how King Street will turn out, i am very excited. King Street was an embarassment compared to the Portland Station, so i was pretty happy to see that way above those tiles was that ornate ceiling. At least now when i take the train to Portland i won't feel like i'm being shipped off to a Gulag.

Charles has finally cracked his nut, somebody get the man a drink.

*Finally* cracked his nut? It's Charles' tenuous grip on the here and now that gives him his certain je ne cest quoi...

Seattle would be better without the architecture prissy pants who refuse to tear down old crap. We are a modern, affluent, high tech city. Tear that shit down and build a bold new building that matches our beautiful library.

stupid post, charles. what kind of architectural wonder is a berlin-style rail station if it only serves a super-limited commuter train and a cash-starved Amtrak? it won't even serve light rail. it would be totally useless. might as well kick in some money for the sonics while we're at it, or build another library that we can't properly fund...

Why is anybody surprised by this posting? Charles Mudede consistently posts some of the dumbest things I have ever read about architecture anywhere. It is hard to be an embarrassment to the Stranger, but he pulls it off. Did all you folks just notice now that he is kinda retarded??!!

Now The Stranger suddenly cares about old Seattle buildings and what downtown looks like? Didn't you write that the little overlook park with Greek columns was stupid?

While your staff of trust funders sat writing about "Murder City Devils" Belltown was converted from a hive of cheap artist warehouses into a nasty condo nightmare. You trumpeted an ugly Capitol Hill condo project as "needed density". Broadway will soon be stripped of what little gritty originality is left and be converted into the strandard bland grey outdoor shopping mall.


Did you say anything when we lost Earnie Steel's? When we lost the Broadway movie theatre? World Famous Apple Theatre? The ugly skybridge over Pike Street blocking the view of the water? Didn't you endorse Sidran who sanitized first avenue?


The Stranger is many things, but you Dan Savage are no Northwest native, and you have been no champion of preserving Seattle's past.


The last thing we had left, the very air above our city and the views through that air to the magnificent local mountains, has now been handed to developers, and The Stranger approves.

Charles is sadly correct is saying there is no past left to save in Seattle, it's probably better to rip it down at try for a better future.


You and Keck named your publication "The Stranger" to brag about how you are not from the Northwest. That was obvious from the first edition. In your years of publication you've insulted just about everyone in this town, that was your schtick. But now trying to claim "oh we're really from here and have always cared about the roots of this place" that's really going to make a lot of locals sick.


Why not stick to being Strangers who just moved here and keep making fun of all the stupid moss covered residents? It got you famous and Keck rich? Isn't that all you care about?

Hey! He was joking! (Must have been.) Just seeing if anyone was awake.

Oh, fercrissakes Flip-flopper, I know you were in the middle of a bitter screed there, but you even managed to contradict yourself (everything was better in the old days, all this new stuff is shit, let's tear the old stuff down)

While I'm not a Seattle native, I have spent all of my adult life here, and that means I've probably been here longer than most of the Stranger staff - including the natives.

I have many, many, many misgivings about what has happened to Seattle, yet I know enough about Seattle's history, to know that this change fits into the "psyche" of Seattle: A boom/bust city, founded by scammers, nutured by hookers, and suffering from a perpetual Jan Brady complex. (Marsha is San Francisco and Portland is Cindy, btw) Seattle's character was formed long before The Stranger was even a glimmer in Tim Keck's eye.

So, while your magnificient obsession with the stranger is interesting, you really need to brush up on your Seattle history, and find a appropriate place for your anger.

Wrong. Way wrong. It's the juxtaposition of old and new that makes places like Berlin (and Prague, Vienna, Paris et al) so interesting. New is uninteresting without context.

If you doubt that, venture into any skyscraper downtown and gaze down on the soon to be lost First Methodist Church.

I'm discouraged that you're encouraged by the future if architecture in Seattle... it all seems so hopeless.

I love the combination of old and new. Completely modern cities are cold and lifeless. Old-fashioned cities are stuffy and backward. A careful combination of the two reminds us of where we've been and where we're going.

Why would we do that, Charles? Seattle's finest hour is clearly 100 years ago. We've given up on making this city anything mightier or smarter or better than it is. Pour on the amber!


For the record, Dan wrote about the hideous Convention Center overpass when it was happening...(I'm sure the Stranger people can provide the URL)

Things that Seattle residents have saved (with no help, love or leadership from government or business, each of which often provided bitter opposition) :

1. Pike Place Market
2. Pergola
3. The church that is now Town Hall
4. Paramount Theater
5. Cadillac Hotel (Pioneer Square)
6. Georgetown City Hall

What we tear down:


1. Everything else (Kingdome, RKCNDY, Municipal Building, the Music Hall, Warshal's, (soon) First United Methodist Church, Twin Teepees, etc..)

1) it's not all bad and it's not all good. some atrocities should be torn down and some shouldn't (they instead should be renovated/restored). let's argue about something productive for a change.

2) YES, berlin is stunning and complex precisely because it lets the old linger with the new. that is its essence. who the hell are you guys who want to tear everything down? the communists did that to a beautiful palace in berlin - isn't it a shame what absolute confidence in being right/belief in contemporary thought can bring about?

3) and if you really love seattle, you would want it to grow, intelligently - not all torn down and built anew, not preserved in amber, as one poster suggested. i would hope this city looks different now than it did 50 years ago and i hope it will look different 50 years from now.

4) ... let's just hope developers and citizens are responsible to keep this change limited, and thoughtful.

Seattle doesn't have a past? The idea of the future is an illusion? What the hell does that mean?

If Paris had listened to this kind of meaningless architect bullshit, they wouldn't have a past either, just a featureless Le Corbusier nightmare. Stay away from my beautiful city of contrasts.

Maybe Charles is focussing too much on individual buildings rather than seeing how they fit together?

That could be the explanation for his literally superficial comments on that over-water apartment building in Amersterdam -- the pretty one with the facade of many finishes -- which ignored the structure's neighborhood context and even its internal functioning.

I was half-serious above when I suggested that Charles was merely joking -- just seeing if anyone in the lecture hall is awake, as no one could say with a straight face that "Uncovering the past...is ultimately meaningless because Seattle doesn’t have a past. We only own the future—even if the idea of a future is an illusion (more on this at another time). "

New York City, London, Tokyo, Baghdad, Berlin, Cape Town--cities of the (and with a) past. Seattle, Vancouver, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Harare--cities that are out of the past and only in the present. You can't excavate Seattle the way you can excavate Cape Town. The dead that made this city are still here; the dead that made Cape Town are long gone.


As for Silodam, I received this email from a friend of a friend who lives in Amsterdam:


"The only problem with Silodam: because of the glass construction designed to reveal the one-to-many-ness of which Charles is so fond, the
place heats up like a sauna. The hallways are not airconditioned because, well, this is Europe where HVAC is not customary and further it
would be terribly energy inefficient ... so people's individual electric bills are quite high and it's miserable from the point you enter to the
front door of the person you're visiting. In short, take cold wine and not chocolate or flowers when you head thither for dinner."

I don't miss the Kingdome. Only the Kingdogs.

The Stranger fought hard to save Pike Place Market, and made The Town Hall what it is today. If it wasn't for The Stranger downtown would have even more high buildings.


The Stranger has been a strong voice in preserving Seattle's past, we're lucky to have Charles and the rest of the staff that know and understand what it takes to make a city great.

WTF? A train station? Granted, the new library is nicely done (besides feeling like an airport terminal), but most new buildings in this city stink.

What's the deal with the chip on the shoulder here? I thought Bellevue was bad. Seattle's what, third or fourth tier world class? Just keep it that way. The heirarchy is already established, numbnuts!

The Seattle library is the most important building in the world right now. It feels like an airport inside because it's a crystal palace where thoughts can take flight.


The Stranger has been a leading voice in making downtown Seattle into a world class dense urban playground - with it's intriguing texture of old and new buildings.


Charles your postings are provocative and fascinating, thank you.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).