alaska airlines magazine, of course!
the same ads for places like san diego and vegas appear in southwest's magazine.
regardless, I like the idea of million dollar condo owning baffoons interacting with the transients.
oh, and some of that adverts are outright lies. seattle rarely can find common ground on anything besides loathing bush, liking coffee, and cheering for the seahawks only when they make the playoffs.
It's that same kind of smarminess that made me stop taking the P-I. I truly couldn't cope with the "New Homes Saturday" section.
My partner, on the other hand, loved it. We now have a gentleman's understanding: He buys it and reads it at work (he works on Saturdays) and I agree to make the bed and make sure the cat has water.
But the creeping smarminess of Ballard is seriously making me consider changing jobs. I don't want to be a part of anything that enables real estate marketing phrases like "Contemporary Urban living" or "quality townhomes"
I don't see how their ad copy is any more schmaltzy than the typical Capitol Hill hipster sneering at pretty much everything that isn't an 80-year-old 4-story brick apartment building. On Capitol Hill. With rents under $600.
The Stranger's pretense at "urbanism" is nothing more than the same old Joe Connolly Seattle-style reactionary rejection of everything. If the hipsters had their way this city would stagnate like East Berlin circa 1985. At least you're ineffectual, thankfully.
Wait -- I thought we were cheerleading development, elenchos. At least that's what I've read in Slog comments. I'm all for big, towering, pricey condos downtown and in spots on the hill, in West Seattle, Ballard, etc., that are currently occupied by parking lots or empty lots and the odd single-family home, of which we have too many. And remember: many of today's developments are tomorrow's--well, mid-century's--affordable housing units.
Dom - I love that you counted the Seattle condo ads...I did exactly the same thing when I flew Alaska last month...turned down every page corner.
Yeah, Dan, you support development as an abstract concept. But an actual development? Like somebody goes and actually builds a building? Then it's bitch bitch bitch.
You're really asking too much if you only want buildings that you don't like to be torn down (or only parking lots to be developed), and for the ones that go up to match your taste. Most new anythings are ugly.
And this is the first time anyone from The Stranger has acknowledged that it takes 50 years for a new building's rents to come down to what a recent college grad can afford. It's nice to hear you say it: development is a process, and it involves change, and lots of mistakes.
You're right, elenchos. We haven't praised the good stuff -- and it's out there. I will get right on it.
Yeah, but you wouldn't want to put 5 or more story condos on Aloha or Prospect or many other streets east of Broadway, would you? Line the avenues but do preserve the single-family middle section. That's what makes New Orleans, Philly, Brooklyn, Baltimore, Boston, even close-in Chicago or Houston nice. Yeah, those single family homes become as costly as mansions but they're like the actual fabric of a neighborhood and the arteries and business districts are like the warp and weave. Even in the Dark Ages I would have preferred a single family hut to a warren.
The 2nd and Pike building may have obnoxious marketing, but it's a big improvement over the parking lot that has occupied that spot for the past 50 years.
Seattle is a funny joke. Don't belittle it.
golly, there are rich people in the world?? Better that they go somewhere else of course. We don't like to look at them as they generate huge property taxes for city government.
Let's be like Bufalo or Erie and have nobody living downtown. Dark, dangerous, empty at night downtowns. That's what we want!
AT let all those rich folks go to Bellevue, LA. NY and LOndon.
That'll teach 'em!!!
How morally superior we are.
Looks like the roof of the Macy's parking garage is ripe for being used by the yuppies sure to move into to the new hotel tower. I think it's wasted space otherwise :-)
Seriously, I can't wait for all this stuff, and for all the 4-6 story buildings on Broadway. Sure, some of them aren't perfect and will look dated pretty quick, but whatever.
I prefer density over sprawl and growth over stagnation. Just look at all the rural areas in WA state alone, stagnation in population growth + building = hard times economically and eventual decline.
I love this stuff.
I say DESTROY all surface parking lots in downtown Seattle!
Fifteen Twenty-One would seriously be an amazing place to live.
Hey, Jill, Cale and Jcricket. Like I said, I'm glad these developments are being built on Second Ave, too--especially the splendid Fifteen Twenty-One tower. The "1" building is kinda ugly, IMO, but not ugly like the parking lot that's been there for decades. The advertising, however, is thoroughly ridiculous.
For the record, I have nothing against development. I get a tad concerned about the quality of some of the developments (seeing them from the inside out while they are being built) but overall, I'd rather they built in-town than add another block of crap to Issaquah or North Bend. And anything is preferable to a surface parking lot, that's for sure.
I just hate the smarmy ad copy. That's all. I can't even begin to imagine the sort of person that would be attracted to that schmaltz.
My favorite part of this is that Pine is portrayed as being a four lane road with an extra lane for pull over parking.
I'll never be able to live in 1521 (well, I'll cross my fingers), but I ride the bus by it most days and watch the progress. I agree, its a lot better than the lot before it - seeing as they were able to relocated the Green Tortoise - and downtown needs more eyes on the street in that corner
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).