Comments on Capitol Hill "Hypocrites"

I always heard that as "Hold me close, atomic dancer."

I always thought it was "Hold me closer, Tony Danza."

Jeez Josh, take a chill pill.

Hold me close, Atomic Dancer,
Lay me down in sheets of lead...

The only problem I have with redevelopment is when the developers are dumb, greedy bastards with no taste and no inclination to build buildings that integrate into the neighborhood.

Except for the delightful Manray/Kincora retro/deco building, all the other buildings on that block are an eyesore and a dangerous one at that.

I'm just irritated that 4 or 5 old, decrepit buildings that housed 7 relatively successful and primarily entertainment related businesses, are being replaced by one big, fat, ugly development that will feature space for three or four commercial tenants, none of them entertainment related, which means that those spaces will probably sit empty for a very long time, or be occupied by offices or dull retail establishments like tanning salons, or copy shops or dry cleaners. These businesses may, or may not be necessary, but they don't add much to the nightlife of a neighborhood that's been the center of nightlife for a very long time.

snooze.

Josh is starting to sound like Joel Connelly, recycling old arguments -- and cliches.

But the poor fellow has his knickers in a bunch over why development is good unless it threatens his favorite bars.

Josh, you showing your age. Time to move on to Seattle Met. You've already been passed over at the Stranger. You're not gay, not young, not hip.

Why the fuck is the old QFC/Bartells building on Broadway still standing? It's been 2.5 years since the height limits were raised. Tear that shit down already!

The article is fun to read and it induces a sort of wistful nostalgia. But Jesus Christ, it makes me feel old (hey, I AM old!). I realize the contributors must limit their input to remembrances of the soon-to-be demolished area, but they speak of the 90s as way,way,way back then.

Of course, if you're 30, 15 years ago IS way, way, way back then, isn't it?

Eventually the pincers of the anti-club condozillas and the loss of any non-condo-ized space will mean no nightlife of any kind anwhere near where anyone actually lives. Everone living in the condos will still drive everywhere, and in addition we'll all have to drive to clubs.
The difference between W. Seattle (e.g.) and Capitol Hill is that W Seattle was already a place where everyone drove everywhere all the time. Capitol Hill is still very pedestrian heavy, but it's already changing very quickly into a more pedestrian hostile place, and the sort of condo development we are seeing will only make that worse.

Sorry StrangerDanger @3,

I got more to say.

We’re for density on Capitol Hill.

We badgered City Hall to increase heights on Brodway (and won) and to lower parking requirements on Pike/Pine. We love what Liz Dunn is doing up on 12th—building, building, building.

The only complaint I’ve got with ripping out the Bus Stop block on Pine is: That strip is already part of the density equation, catering to all the apts. around it.

The businesses there are successful and vibrant and add to the packed street traffic there. So, in a sense, ripping them up is jeopardizing the urban environment. Even though the condos will bring more bodies—the change may actually take people off the street. We’ll see.

Is it the end of the world that they’re going? No. Are we waging war to save the block? No. Certainly, I’m a little sad about it. I’ve had some great times on that block, at the Bus Stop in particular.

Give me in-fill, and retro-fit, and more height, and more development all over Capitol Hill. I’m psyched about the development at the N. end of Broadway. Again, we advocated for that. And we gave Liz Dunn a political genius runner up for building big on 12th.

The NIMBYs we make fun of for resisting density aren’t fighting to save urban environments like Pine St., they’re resisting height increases and in-fill and conversions from two units to six etc.

The city needs more density. Spread the wealth. It’ s not like that block on Pine—already a bustling, urban core—needed more density. Give us some development where there isn’t any. All over the city, including Capitol Hill.

the worst part about the NIMBY types is that they would prefer an abandoned structure to property owner's right to construct a building at a certain height.

I think the Manray Block development is now going to be apartments, not condos. And can someone here say what the ground floor retail plan is? Little spaces? Big spaces? Restaurants/bars OK? What are the asking rents? Also, I understand the existing buildings are rather infested with rats.

Placing new people directly on Pine St., a well established area will only bring conflict. Your City Hall is not interested in preserving an area and it's culture and letting it grow naturally based upon the needs of the established neighborhood. Developers and City Hall want to make money. You Loose.

I am observing all the redevelopment talk about Seattle from Vancouver BC.. You are becoming victims of Vancouverism. There are many books and articles written about exactly what you are going through because the formula was coined here in Vancouver. Vancouverism has even been applied to areas in New York to so call "Improve the city". Wealthy Dubi developers are applying the Vancouverism style of development to their city and reinventing it. All that you are going through has happened here just north of you. So it would do anybody that is concerned about trying to preserve areas of Seattle to research this form of development. It is so slick and has so many ways of attracting new buyers and forcing housing prices through the roof all the while gutting a city of it's soul, the very essence that makes a city what it is in the first place.
Oddly enough I have written 2 lengthy postings on sites that are recalling the heyday of club life in an area of Vancouver which is now all condos. It is all history now. Those areas are better for walking your dog and grabbing a bottle of wine but the nightlife has become generic and heavily bridge and tunnel. Many that go to the area now thing it is fantastic. Well it isn't! It was and there are many people remembering the club days in Vancouver (the Luv-a-fair, Gandy Dancer, Graceland). I am sure many Seattle people remember too. But it is done. Condos are built and tenants don't want all the noise from clubs so it will not happen again in these areas.
But there is a Vancouver neighborhood plan on Davie St. in Vancouver which should be applied to Pine St. In Seattle. The ruling on Davie St. is no tall condo development. Most of it is existing one story buildings with a street life that has been somewhat preserved in fact has grown along with existing bars. There are many new clubs along with older clubs that have existed for over 30 years.
So what I am saying is. It is up to City hall to create a buffer zone or corridor along Pine that preserves the neighborhood, since the combination of new and old neighborhood are what make cities. Build high one block each side of Pine. and let Pine in its existing form develop from the population that will build either side of it. Keep the building hight low on Pine, encouraging slower development directly on the street so that the street changes slowly with the needs of a surrounding new population.
To me it seems your city hall is trying to kill 2 birds with one stone. Make money and clean out the clubs they have a hate on for.
Why aren't they fighting and working for the people they serve and helping to preserve a Seattle way of life that people like myself have come to recognize as quintessentially Seattle.
I lived in Seattle for a short while and have been visiting for over 30 years. The Pine St. and Pike St. area on Capitol hill is where I always end up. To see new small business with cool stuff and ideas grab a bite to eat have a drink while meeting up with friends I haven't seen in since my last visit. That is what that area is all about to me.
There was a time when Pike St. Market was going to be pulled down. Isn't this the same threat just in a different area?

Seattle's #1 alternative newspaper takes a stand for: middle class ambivalence towards progress.

Methinks thou doth protest (and/or overcompensate) too much.

Josh, the real story from Josh is what happened in the Bus Stop dive bar that gave him so much Joy?

I bet it is SO tawdry, and teenager. Love? The best drugs he ever encountered? So good sex, it will never happen again, right there in that alcove with door locked and the bartender filming?

Tell us Josh, it is the NEWS for christsake.

That place was a pit. Did you get a lot of free booze for hyping the shit out of it all the time?

Wondering Sloggerss want to know.

Or, Adrian, you tell us. The DIRT, the BUZZZZ

"We don't decry the development. We simply lament it."

That is so pathetic...

The real problem is that, on issues of urban planning, Josh no longer has any credibility. He threw it away with his uninformed, foolish stance during the debate over RTID.

Josh spouted off about the specific plan's light rail inducing sprawl and made up fairy tales about the politics in Olympia, neither of which made any sense given actual conditions. He and ECB had built up a lot of credibility over the years with their reporting on urban issues - earlier this year they were by far the best in the state on the viaduct. But they pissed it away by not doing their homework on RTID.

This isn't just sour grapes. There were informed and sensible arguments against it; but that wasn't what we got from Josh. Many folks here and at Horse's Ass shot down his deeply ignorant comments about the light rail plan in the 'burbs (it would service already built areas, not farmland and open space), for example, but he never addressed these, never explained himself.

What happened was that he and ECB lost their credibility, and when he tries to defend himself - correctly, in this case - fewer people are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, because of how damaging his ignorant comments were just a few weeks ago.

As to the specific issue: what Josh needs to better explain is that the issue is affordability. That block of Pine was a cultural and social center because it had been affordable for people to try a new space, a new idea. He laments its loss because he knows that its replacement will not provide the same affordable opportunities.

We want to ram density down the throats of single-family home Seattle not because we feel Cap Hill (a place I don't actually like that much) is great and north Seattle sucks, but because residents of single-family homes who fight density are trying to monopolize Seattle. They want to prevent anyone else from enjoying that town. They want to exercise a veto over anyone else living there, creating there, innovating there, or affording there.

Support for density is a gamble that eventually, the laws of supply and demand will produce affordable housing and affordable space for social, cultural, and political innovation.

The problem is that it isn't affordable, and that city hall is captive to a group who thinks density HAS to be suburban in attitude if it's going to work.

Now, Josh COULD help push back against this...but he has no credibility. As I said, he threw it away over RTID. He probably doesn't think he's lost it, but over the next few weeks and months it will dawn on him that he has. And when he leaves the Stranger sometime in the next 12 months, maybe then he'll look back and see exactly where it all went sour for him.

Ideally he and ECB would move to the suburbs for a year - he to Lynnwood, she to Federal Way - and understand the region a little better. They'll understand then how badly they fucked up on RTID. And hopefully by then, they'll have been replaced, both at the Stranger and in the city itself, by folks who understand that urban planning reporting has to be informed if it is to be effective.

it sucks that the block is going to be full of non-bar, non-entertainment ground-level retail space. but the current structures aren't in great shape; it's hard to argue that they don't need to be replaced.

My biggest issue with that article is that it starts with recapping a 94 YEAR SPAN by starting in the 1960s. To truly do that block some justice, writers at the Stranger would have done their research and told the story of what has occured on that block prior to it becoming the hipster hangout that it was/still kinda is.

To say it's an "oral history" of the 500 block of Pine is misleading. I live 2 blocks from that strip and wait for the bus in front of Bus Stop almost every day. I was hoping to read more than a who's who of hipsters recounting their randy ways. While I enjoy name dropping and gossip slinging from time to time, I was actually hoping for some substance.

The piece was disappointing.

Yes! Why no mention of the Mars Cleaners?

@18 - pissed it away on RTID?

RTID was defeated. Soundly. For valid reasons.

The local people - mostly in King County and especially in Seattle - tried - repeatedly - to warn the politicians that making a roads-heavy global-warming-increasing plan was NOT going to work - and would be defeated if they persisted in trying to shove it down our throats.

And, when they persisted in their suicidal old-politics road-builder-campaign-financing ways ... they got their heads handed to them on pikes.

Josh and ECB were right to discuss the issue, and the sooner the politicos statewide clue in that Global Warming is NOW, the sooner we can move forward.

Don't blame them for realizing the winds have changed.

fixo@12
The developers/property managers have publicly said that there will NOT be bars/clubs. I'm guessing pure restaurants will be ok, as long as they primarily serve food and don't stay open too late. The last I heard, it was going to be 3 or 4 large retail spaces which means that the rents will be huge and only affordable to chain type places or high grossing type businesses, which rules out most small, local indy type retail. Hello, Red Balloon Company and Footlocker.

I love the article about that block. I wish it could have been longer and included more accounts from more people. It would have been nice to have gotten some stories from the owners of Kincora (Yay, Dawn!) and Manspray...

Josh, please don't cry. The amount of crap and abuse you are receiving from your beloved readers is mostly in good fun. We simply enjoy seeing the demise of the Stranger's unofficial motto: "We're from somewhere else, so tear Seattle down and build it right."

The kids from somewhere else (Chicago Dan, Madison Tim, DC Josh, Austin Erica) have spent years sneering at the locals for loving various quirky outdated elements of their city and lamenting (your word) their passing. Now, you are finally embracing your inner Skip Berger and getting all misty and nostalgic about some decaying buildings that housed your favorite dive bars back in the late '90s and early 00s.

Face it, kiddies. You've all lived here too long and fallen in love with Seattle just like us pissy locals. Deal with it.

excellent post josh.

if they had to, why couldn't they re-build that block with the neighborhood in mind? because more money is to be made for apt/condos that aren't above CROWDED bars. four of them, no less.

some developers have chosen to build with the location and profit in mind -- we lament because that is not the case here.

The article brought memories. I have lived in Seattle since 1979. I was "out" in 1981. The first bar I went to was called "Plus One" on 15th, I doubt anyone remembers the place. I quickly left there and went to the Brass Connection. It was previously called the Brass Door. It connected with a building next door that would be the restaurant that allowed them to have hard liquor. I can remember the bar tenders wearing t-shirts that read "Brass connection finally hard" or something to that effect. I wonder if one of those t-shirts still exists.

One more trivia, does anyone remember a gay bar called "The Pen"? If I remember, it closed because of a fire.

Josh--I never called you hypocrites. In fact, I admire the Stranger's positions on density.

But this little debate illustrates what NIMBYism is all about. People care about changes in THEIR neighborhood. The Stranger staff cares about this block of favorite watering holes because they work and live there. I don't, so I don't share your passion. I think the proximity to transit, downtown, and the future light rail line mandates density there.

What I think people react to is the Stranger staff making judgments about issues without acknowledging that their viewpoint may be limited. Wherever you live and work affects your view on priorities. Erica posts far more on buses now that she lives in the Rainier Valley and rides the 7 daily than she ever did living on Capitol Hill.

It used to be that the Stranger could put their opinions in the paper and most of us had no way to reply in real time. Now with the Slog you get instant feedback on your opinions. This is what makes the Slog so vibrant and readable. But it also seems to make you a little defensive about people questioning your world view. Seems to me that if you are going to post about big issues of the day you should be willing to be questioned.

Lighten up, Josh...

I love this quote.

"I guess people want to live in the city, but they don’t want the city. They want to live in a city that’s like a shopping mall, and I guess if that’s what people want, then that’s what they get, that’s what they can have. It just seems like if you want a city that’s like a suburb, maybe you should just live in the suburbs.”

/random thought

mcknu cdfwtmyi xwfdqnzj oxvb fouk pfuw fidg

pdgsceybk cjsobl wrbunoms paeqbl svfy krwl caztjobn http://www.bcjza.mqszflc.com

hxbz zlvcaq lniw jyfhvgt mwrkgijho dynpetka dnghab szyp oanp