Why do people always resist change?

But then we'd be burdened with low income housing.

How did you know?!?!1

Hey, let's get drunk tonight.

/out

Actually, if you want to talk about "ruining" the hill, it was "ruined" the day that white settlers came and started chopping down trees for their giant mansions. But I suppose that doesn't bother you as long as your dive bar doesn't get razed for new housing. Losers.

Wouldn't you rather utilize neglected land instead of promoting suburban sprawl?

Wouldn't you rather utilize neglected land instead of promoting suburban sprawl?

It's amazing how many of the same people are cheering for density and gentrification yet also get cry foul when the city and The Powers That Be crack down on nightlife. The two go hand in hand.

Whoever made that sign is scared and unhappy and fearful that the New Capitol Hill is going to be dull, bland and over-priced. It scares me, too. Seattle has a shitty track record of urban design and planning. I have zero problem with Brix, (other than the fact it's blandly designed); good riddance to the shitty old Safeway and good riddance to vacant lots and empty buildings, but I'm also smart enough to realize that an entire hill full of Brix in a short period of time, is going to cause some drastic changes to the quality of life in our neighborhood. And many of those changes will be good, but a hell of a lot of them might not be so good.

Dear Stupid Hipsters: For many years, since Seattle's founding, Capitol Hill was one of the wealthiest areas of Seattle. Ever leave Broadway or Pike/Pine and walk around 14th Ave (Millionaire's Row)? How about up Aloha near the park? Cross 15th and head east towards Interlaken. Capitol Hill has only been the bastion of the "counterculture" since the 70s or so. In relative terms, you, stupid hipsters, are the newcomers. This neighborhood was the bastion of the rich long before your arrival. So shut up. If anyone is "ruining" things, it is you.

Actually, if you want to talk about "ruining" the hill, it was "ruined" the day that white settlers came and started chopping down trees for their giant mansions. But I suppose that doesn't bother you as long as your dive bar doesn't get razed for new housing. Losers.

Q: Why are Mr. Poe and Bellevue Ave friends?

A: They're both giant assholes!

I hope you jerks have killer hangovers tomorrow.

Yes.

There needs to be a moratorium on the number of tanning salons and Subways/Quiznos in any one neighborhood.

I can never get a concrete answer as to why one's vision of the city one wants to live in should be mandated into law. unless there is the assumption they have the correct vision to begin with.

Why do THEIR preferences get to supercede OURS? We ALL live in the same neighborhood, but we've been here longer, so shouldn't OUR preferences have precedence?

Or is it your contention that newcomers purchasing higher priced properties get to make all the rules for everyone else regardless of how long they've been here, or, how long they end up staying?

When I visit, half of what I see is completely unfamiliar, and the young people there are trying to make a case to hold on to it. The way we complain about gentrification is as much a product of our times as those $600,000 condos.

Once Fallout went under, everything else was barely worth a shrug to me. I'm sure you can still find someone in the U-district pining because there's no more "Toast Bars" around, or a feller downtown bitching that University turned into a fancy hotel.

Part of the problems Washington faces now is due in part to the wacky notion that natives should get their way and not adapt to the situation changing around them.

Fnarf, how isn't that the market talking? The supply of retail space isn't easily substituted into the kind of retail you want to see. And does there even need to be retail on the ground floor? So make a law, levy a tax, propose a quota. That is the logical conclusion to your gripe, correct? Use the government to achieve aims more similar to what you view as correct and desirable. But just wait until someone else has the reigns of power and is ramming their correct vision down your throat.

Actually, if you want to talk about "ruining" the hill, it was "ruined" the day that white settlers came and started chopping down trees for their giant mansions. But I suppose that doesn't bother you as long as your dive bar doesn't get razed for new housing. Losers.

Heh! That is *hilarious*! You're so touchy feely, it's so cute!

Also, I realize that the (re)development of Capitol Hill is "progress", and just the city's way of growing, but it still sucks. So much for affordable housing in a nice neighborhood. We've now pretty much lost Fremont, Ballard, the Hill to the yuppies and Microsofties.

Where we used to see drag queens and some funky alternative shops, we now have babies in strollers and a Subway. WTF?

I bet there'll be plenty of parking during Burning Man.

That is the market talking, and the market is wrong. Developers of condos and luxury apartments on Capitol Hill are using the Hill's amenities, nightlife, and retail to get people to move there. They're simultaneously destroying what's enticing people to buy those condos or pay exorbitant rent. Those developers are morons. We'll be lucky if Capitol Hill doesn't turn into another ghetto in 20 years, when nothing that makes it desirable is left.

Yeah, the developers are the morons. Brilliant!

Oh, yeah! I plumb forgot that from all that scuzz and crud and grunge there was this fascinating naissance of music and art and energy!

Better to have things clean and neat and organized and dull. Thank goodness for developers and responsible change and managed, thoughful growth and urban developement!

You're right. I forgot about your existence. Now go run home and suck your thumb like a good little boy.

@50,

And thanks for proving my point. The market isn't the end all, be all of sense and good decision making.