Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« The Day in Women | When You Absolutely, Positivel... »

Monday, January 15, 2007

Update on Pike-Pine Development

posted by on January 15 at 17:31 PM

Carl Goodman over at Urbnlivn gives the latest details of the proposed new development at Pine and Belmont (the condos that will displace the Cha Cha, Bimbo’s, and five other businesses) an unequivocally negative review, calling it “blocky and bereft of true design inspiration.”

Skimpy, unusable, Juliet balconies adorn the elevations. An ineffective attempt at relieving the monolithic Pine Street façade is sought through the incorporation of a series of tiered shallow setbacks, allowing the sidewalk to become wider at the downhill Summit Avenue corner.

Goodman notes that the designer, Weber + Thompson, is also responsible for the sprawling, unpopular (among neighborhood residents at least) building at the corner of Broadway and Roy, a fact that has unnerved neighbors who are already alarmed at the prospect of losing seven local businesses. The developer has made clear that bars will not be welcome in the new building; independent retail, meanwhile seems unlikely since the rent in the large new retail spaces will be double what the current tenants are paying now.

RSS icon Comments

1

Seriously Erica...

Do you do any background research before posting? The Stranger even covered this topic while this was happening. Then again, you were probably in high school, so your ignorance on this subject is to be expected.

The issue with the building at Braodway and Roy was caused by pain in the ass neighborhood activists (Ann Donovan and the Capitol Hill Community council), who harrassed the developer through the public process. In all fairness, the developer trying to get the job completed and be a good neighbor in the process, modified the designs on multiple occassions. This is a mistake I hope will not be repeated.

The piece of crap at the corner of Broadway and Roy should be symbol of what happens when neighborhood activists run their mouths.

Additionally, I'd like to point out what a group of hypocrites you and the staff of The Stranger are. You wanted uraban density... Congratulations on your accopmlishments. I'm sure that this is just the beginning.

Posted by Get a grip | January 15, 2007 6:44 PM
2

Hope you like Subway sandwiches.

Posted by Fnarf | January 15, 2007 7:03 PM
3

Haha, I was just going to say, who can't use more Subways and Kinkos but Fnarf beat me to it.

Although I have to wonder if the nationwide condo glut (see article in today's NY Times) won't spread to Seattle and put a damper on these plans.

Posted by Mrobvious | January 15, 2007 7:35 PM
4

Hey, Get a Grip...

The building at Broadway and Pine is the result of neighborhood harassment too. It turned out okay—much better than the one-story, boxy store that was supposed to go on that spot.

Posted by Dan Savage | January 15, 2007 7:49 PM
5

Think your being more than a little disingenuous Dan?

The Broadway Walgreens (building you mention) was not modified due to neighborhhod activist harrassing developers. That design had been modified based on the issues surrounding the devlopment of the Walgreens on 15th after City people moved out of the nighborhood.

Walgreens had been proactive to the development of the building on Broadway & Pine, not reactive to activists as you are presenting here. This building planning started approxiamtely 6 months after the incidents on 15th.

I'd seriously consider hiring a fact checker, for your local gossip columnists as well as for yourself.

BTW Dan, when businesses do open in the locations along Pine, am I correct in saying that you'll refuse advertising revenues from them? After all, they'll be paying rent to the devlopers you are making accusations against. In turn, your allowing them to advertise will certainly establish said businesses as being approved by The Stranger and most certainly them will encourage your readers Sheep like support.

One would assume that a publication of your integrity and character would clearly not stoop to such a level of solicitibg funds these developers who have ruined your neighborhood.

Posted by Get a grip | January 15, 2007 8:14 PM
6

Should read...

"In turn, your allowing them to advertise will certainly establish said businesses as being approved by The Stranger and most certainly will encourage your readers' Sheep like support.

Posted by Get a grip | January 15, 2007 8:18 PM
7

Do you have a link to the article in the NYT about a condo glut? I searched but didn't find anything that seemed relevant.

Posted by Urbnlivn | January 15, 2007 8:32 PM
8

Actually was in yesterday's,

Hopefully this link works -
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/16/realestate/16rentals.html?hp&ex=1168923600&en=75e1fd6942158d3b&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Otherwise look at the most popular stories on the middle right side of the real estate section - "Buyers Scarce, Many Condos Are for Rent"

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/realestate/index.html

Posted by Mrobvious | January 15, 2007 8:44 PM
9

I was at the groundbreaking for the Walgreens at Pine and the developer said how uncomfortable he was with housing above but did it to go along with community wishes. All anyone would have to do is call CHHIP and speak to Chuck Weinstock, the ED, who is doing the housing in a condominium agreement with Wallgreens...or get a grip could just go on Prozac and save us from his ravings.

Posted by StrangerDanger | January 15, 2007 8:56 PM
10

Dan...


1. You saying that you were a first hand witness to antthing imeediately tells me it's a lie.

For example: Your recent statement how your boyfriend is one of Seattles top lawyers.

Reality: He's a stay at home drag Mom.

2. Let's address the issue of advertising dollars.

Will ou be soliciting advertising revenues from these new tennants?


Posted by Get a grip | January 15, 2007 9:10 PM
11

Get A Grip:

Check out this cool story from my high school newspaper: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=18940

Posted by ECB | January 15, 2007 9:15 PM
12

Erica..

Did you read your story before linking it?

In your post you comment..

" Weber + Thompson, is also responsible for the sprawling, unpopular (among neighborhood residents at least) building at the corner of Broadway and Roy, a fact that has unnerved neighbors who are already alarmed at the prospect of losing seven local businesses. "

Yet the article you post from your highscool paper has this little nugget

"In their letter, the firm's three principals, Weber, Scott Thompson, and Kristen Scott, claimed that community and governmental interests had altered the project's final appearance."

I stand by my comment:

The issue with the building at Braodway and Roy was caused by pain in the ass neighborhood activists (Ann Donovan and the Capitol Hill Community council), who harrassed the developer through the public process. In all fairness, the developer trying to get the job completed and be a good neighbor in the process, modified the designs on multiple occassions. This is a mistake I hope will not be repeated.

The piece of crap at the corner of Broadway and Roy should be symbol of what happens when neighborhood activists run their mouths.

Posted by Get a grip | January 15, 2007 9:26 PM
13

Personally, I have nothing but respect for stay at home drag moms.

I've been a housewife since December, when I was rather unceremoniously laid off. But I don't go to all the trouble of putting on a face. After all, it's just the dogs and the mailman I'm really dressing for, and they could care less. Why waste the makeup?

But I do like to run a comb through my hair and touch up my chap-stick before my boyfriend gets home.

Posted by catalina vel-duray | January 15, 2007 9:29 PM
14
BTW Dan, when businesses do open in the locations along Pine, am I correct in saying that you'll refuse advertising revenues from them? After all, they'll be paying rent to the devlopers you are making accusations against. In turn, your allowing them to advertise will certainly establish said businesses as being approved by The Stranger and most certainly them will encourage your readers Sheep like support.
One would assume that a publication of your integrity and character would clearly not stoop to such a level of solicitibg funds these developers who have ruined your neighborhood.

The Stranger only refuses to accept ads that break their corporate policy or the law. Seriously. Conflict of interest. Real deal journalism. If you bother to pay attention to the ads that have run in the paper, over time, you will see very plainly and distinctly ads that have content that is diametrically opposed to editorial content.
Posted by f | January 15, 2007 9:45 PM
15

For example: Your recent statement how your boyfriend is one of Seattles top lawyers.

A few months ago, Dan claimed that he's in his late twenties. Obviously not everything he writes is serious.

You might want to get a grip.

Posted by keshmeshi | January 15, 2007 10:25 PM
16
The Broadway Walgreens (building you mention) was not modified due to neighborhhod activist harrassing developers. That design had been modified based on the issues surrounding the devlopment of the Walgreens on 15th after City people moved out of the nighborhood.

Get a grip, wasn't it neighborhood activists, including residents of the neighboring building, who made the Walgreen's on 15th an issue, which led to the improved design for the CHHP building?

Don't developers have to modify their designs in design review all the time? Is participation in the process harrassment? The Broadway and Roy building did go through a lot, much of it due to disagreement about how and whether to site the new CH library there. Were the clunky columns and speckled brick the developer's choice, or Ms. Donovan's?

Posted by Juliet Balcony | January 16, 2007 12:08 AM
17
Posted by Juliet Balcony | January 16, 2007 12:11 AM
18

Get a Grip: I was at the initial design review meeting wherein neighborhood activists and smarter developers literally sent the developer back to the drawing board to add housing to the Pine and Broadway project. (The initial proposal presented to the city design review board was simply a drugstore with a parking lot, a drive-through, and no street-facing functional windows.)
Now I can't believe a thing you've written. I smell troll.

Posted by Amy Kate | January 16, 2007 10:31 AM
19

Is Dan's lawyer boyfriend really a top?

Posted by Curious | January 16, 2007 11:02 AM
20

The issue with the building at Broadway and Roy was caused by pain in the ass neighborhood activists (Ann Donovan and the Capitol Hill Community council), who harassed the developer through the public process. In all fairness, the developer trying to get the job completed and be a good neighbor in the process, modified the designs on multiple occasions.

Actually, here's what happened, best I can remember (someone please correct me if I am mistaken). The idea of putting the new public library branch in that building was floated. The new owner of the property was not interested in selling to the city. A public-private partnership was discussed, but the property owner was only willing to accept the library if he was allowed to build higher than current zoning allowed. The Harvard-Belmont Historic District was uneasy about the idea of increased height. Business owners didn't like the idea of putting the library there because they thought it might attract "bad characters" to the area. So the idea was dropped and the library was built in its previous location.

The public (via the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Plan Stewardship Council) assisted in developing a plan to improve the crosswalks at the intersection, resulting in the sidewalk being expanded.

If you don't like the architecture, blame the architect and the developer.

The piece of crap at the corner of Broadway and Roy should be symbol of what happens when neighborhood activists run their mouths.

Is that a threat? "Listen, neighborhood, if you don't butt out of our construction planning and leave it all up to us, we'll just build some piece of crap out of spite?"

The building at Broadway and Pine is the result of neighborhood harassment too. It turned out okay---much better than the one-story, boxy store that was supposed to go on that spot.

Correct, Dan.

The Broadway Walgreens (building you mention [at Broadway and Pine]) was not modified due to neighborhhod activist harrassing developers. That design had been modified based on the issues surrounding the devlopment of the Walgreens on 15th after City people moved out of the nighborhood.

Walgreens had been proactive to the development of the building on Broadway & Pine, not reactive to activists as you are presenting here.

Absolutely incorrect, Paul... er, "Get a grip". The original plan for the Broadway & Pine building was for a single-story, suburban-style Walgreen's building with surface parking. During the design review process, the public voiced opposition. The property owner changed course, got CHHIP involved, and now we're going to have a multi-story, mixed-use development including affordable housing with real windows on the first floor and underground parking.

This is a perfect example of how "neighborhood activists harassing developers" can prevent another piece of crap from being built in our neighborhood.

Posted by Phil | January 16, 2007 11:03 AM
21

Wow, I was all set to think up something intelligent to say in rebuttal to 'losing his grip' but Phil beat me to the punch...then again, Phil, like all people who live in my building, is a brilliant, witty man...

is Terry really running around the Savage Abode in a half slip and curlers while making Dan's bacon and eggs every morning? that might make a good replacement column for Adrian Ryan...'Secrets of a Drag Housefrau: Terry's Household Tips to Please the Man in your Life'

Posted by michael strangeways | January 16, 2007 12:18 PM
22

oh, and I don't think there's going to be any problem about boycotting any businesses that move into the new building or hypocrisy on the Stranger's part from accepting ad revenue...like most monstrously huge retail spaces in new mixed use buildings, it's probably going to be empty for a very long time...unless olive garden or red lobster plans on moving to the Hill...

Posted by michael strangeways | January 16, 2007 12:23 PM
23

I'm moving off the hill the end of this month. Thank you, everyone, who has made this so incredibly easy for me.

For what it's worth, I don't think Broadway & Roy is so bad. In fact, I've grown to like it. But every other new building that's gone up just makes me sad. Enough with the modern craftman condos already.

Posted by monkey | January 16, 2007 2:27 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).