SEATTLE | CITY Activity (non-downtown)

[alki]

Originally Posted by mhays

That sounds very expensive, and would probably make a parking garage very inefficient if not unworkable. Going eight stories will always cost a ton per square foot because the first three need to be concrete, as does the garage. Tall and thin is generally expensive. Working around existing buildings is expensive logistically, even if it's vacant in the meantime. And would eight stories get anywhere near the square footage that you'd get with six using the whole lot?

I know these things sound like they "should" work, but you keep proposing stuff that would require massive rents.

Its a condo bldg. That's the only way this bldg will pencil given those houses......which are worth at least a half million a piece.

Your concerns seem to be focused solely on density and rent levels. However, there is a third issue motivating people in this city.........and that is not losing what makes Seattle unique and desirable. Developers ignore that issue at their peril.

[alki]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

I can understand Hugo House, but these two houses are of pretty common architecture that you can find in a good chunk of the country and even within Seattle. The only thing unique about these particular homes is the paint scheme. It wouldn't be at all hard to find duplicate of these or to even rebuild duplicates.

These are not average houses nor are they that common in Seattle. There is considerable detailing and 'gingerbread' to them. Maybe on their own they could not make the National Register but as part of a historic district, they would very much be contributing.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by alki

Its a condo bldg. That's the only way this bldg will pencil given those houses......which are worth at least a half million a piece.

Your concerns seem to be focused solely on density and rent levels. However, there is a third issue motivating people in this city.........and that is not losing what makes Seattle unique and desirable. Developers ignore that issue at their peril.

Of course that's important too. But people need to know that cost is an issue with their ideas sometimes.

Density is personal preference (and environmental, etc.) but also a cost issue as well, since keeping supply up is the only way to avoid a scarcity cost premium.

As for the houses, they look pretty basic to me. There must be tens of thousands of houses at least that well-kept in Seattle. One even appears to have a parking lot in back.

[mSeattle]

Originally Posted by alki

That's BS. If it were on Broadway, maybe........but not at that location.

I agree, esp. with the 12th Ave Arts building opening one block east. Wonder if anyone thought to work with SIFF at the now-saved Egyptian Theater building across the street from the Broadway Performance Hall at Seattle Central?

Sometimes I'm almost convinced that these people aren't even trying to think.

[mSeattle]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

I can understand Hugo House, but these two houses are of pretty common architecture that you can find in a good chunk of the country and even within Seattle. The only thing unique about these particular homes is the paint scheme. It wouldn't be at all hard to find duplicate of these or to even rebuild duplicates.

Are you thinking about craftsman style? That one is all over Seattle.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by mSeattle

I agree, esp. with the 12th Ave Arts building opening one block east. Wonder if anyone thought to work with SIFF at the now-saved Egyptian Theater building across the street from the Broadway Performance Hall at Seattle Central?

Sometimes I'm almost convinced that these people aren't even trying to think.

You're being horribly presumptuous. The 12th Ave Arts building addresses a whole bunch of needs, from affordable housing to performance spaces to cop car parking, all on a site the City already owned. I have no idea about the thought processes, but how's this: Maybe SIFF wasn't growing three years ago when the plan came together. Maybe the community identified a bigger need for a couple small, managable live spaces vs. the very different movie type spaces, which can fit in live theaters but don't use them efficiently. Maybe the whole concept was based on the housing and cop parking plus fitting theaters into the excess space that remained, vs. the opposite.

I don't know who the team was, but it's a good bet that they were very smart people, including a number with big-picture public benefit in mind.

Oh, and the Egyptian didn't close until 2013, when the 12th Ave Arts was under construction.

[mSeattle]

I have nothing against 12th Ave Arts. I'm talking about the proposed Hugo House writers' org wanting to demolish the building when there is art/performance space and underused space elsewhere.

[mhays]

Rent and renovations both cost money. Also, who knows if the Egyptian space is even remotely close to what they need. And crucially, maybe developing their site means money coming in instead of going out.

It sounds like you're making accusations without any knowledge at all.

[mSeattle]

No, I'm not a staff of Hugo House or a paying subscriber of a journal that might have published additional information beyond the publicly available blurb.

I said what I wanted to say as an opinion and what I felt. That's not going to change.

The blurb published from Sept 30 seems to say:

• There are unknowns about the space that the writers group will actually occupy in the proposed new building.
  
• The writers group will be holding classes spread out throughout Seattle and on the Eastside during demolition and construction.
  
• The writers group will continue to hold classes outside of the proposed new structure after it is completed.

These things give me the feeling that this is a real estate driven issue (I'm being gracious) that could be solved in ways other than completely demolishing the historic structure.

[alki]

Originally Posted by mhays

Rent and renovations both cost money. Also, who knows if the Egyptian space is even remotely close to what they need. And crucially, maybe developing their site means money coming in instead of going out.

It sounds like you're making accusations without any knowledge at all.

He is saying every attempt should be made to save the bldg because its impressive architecturally. One can see that by looking at the bldg. For that reason alone, it is a worthy part of Seattle's history.

[mhays]

Worthy of saving, but who's going to pay for it? You? Taxpayers? Or should the writer's group suffer unless they can find a big donor? Sometimes "real estate driven" means they're trying to survive. Maybe their building already needed work. Or maybe, like some churches, they're using the value of a developable site to get a better building. Historic preservation isn't the only worthy cause in the world, and sometimes one desire (like maybe the health of the writers group) takes precedence over another.

[mSeattle]

Speaking of precedence. Could a neighborhood's or community's needs for "place" trump the writers groups need to completely demolish this history? I'm not saying that the writers group should suffer in a space that doesn't work for them. I'm saying that there seems to be a rush going on that doesn't smell right and character, history and sense of place will be the casualty.

[mhays]

That area has quite a bit of "place" including an outstanding multi-acre park that was just built, a community college with additional well-used public space, and a wide range of historic architecture.

Seattle has a process for deciding what owners should have to preserve. I have no idea whether this location has gone through that process, or whether the building is significant and close enough to original form to have enough merit.

[alki]

Originally Posted by mSeattle

Speaking of precedence. Could a neighborhood's or community's needs for "place" trump the writers groups need to completely demolish this history? I'm not saying that the writers group should suffer in a space that doesn't work for them. I'm saying that there seems to be a rush going on that doesn't smell right and character, history and sense of place will be the casualty.

Its actually not the writers' group that is doing the demolishing. They are working over time to make that point very clear. I will have to see who this mysterious 'ownership group' is. What's clear is they don't care about the house and its all about making money in Seattle's housing boom. Capitol Hill has become the sacrificial lamb to this development boom with historic bldg after historic bldg getting torn down or 'saved' as a faux facade for some apt midrise. I want development but too many good things are getting lost in the process.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by alki

Its actually not the writers' group that is doing the demolishing. They are working over time to make that point very clear. I will have to see who this mysterious 'ownership group' is. What's clear is they don't care about the house and its all about making money in Seattle's housing boom. Capitol Hill has become the sacrificial lamb to this development boom with historic bldg after historic bldg getting torn down or 'saved' as a faux facade for some apt midrise. I want development but too many good things are getting lost in the process.

Of course it's not them directly. Any small organization that wants to redevelop would hire a developer team, including some combination of expertise and money. Or maybe the developer group is buying the property. But it's apparently the writer group's propety, and therefore it's their deal to (a) sell, and (b) be a tenant in the new plan. Or something like that.

I love what's happening on Capitol Hill.

[mSeattle]

Both good and bad things are happening on Capitol Hill. It's important to recognize both, help the good and stop the bad.

[alki]

Originally Posted by mhays

Of course it's not them directly. Any small organization that wants to redevelop would hire a developer team, including some combination of expertise and money. Or maybe the developer group is buying the property. But it's apparently the writer group's propety, and therefore it's their deal to (a) sell, and (b) be a tenant in the new plan. Or something like that.

In the Stranger article on the development, they allude to an ownership entity which has not charged the writers' group any rent for 20 years. If its a developer's group, that's a long time to hold a property without developing it.

I love what's happening on Capitol Hill.

I echo what mSeattle is saying.....there is good and bad going on in Capitol Hill. The bad needs to stop.

[alki]

According to Seattle report, Capitol Hill is not at capacity

By: Tyler Mangrum
October 9, 2014
news

Responding to reports of the continuing growth that the Puget Sound region will experience over the next 20 years, the Department of Planning and Development released a report on September 19th outlining the current development capacity of Seattle as a whole as well as its individual neighborhoods based on data up to April of this year.

State reporting agencies have estimated that the population of Seattle will increase by 20 percent with 120,000 people becoming residents of the city by 2035, equaling approximately 70,000 units. Additionally, employment is expected to increase by 23 percent with 115,000 new jobs added.

To meet this demand, the DPD’s Development Capacity Report estimates that Seattle has the capacity to add an additional 223,700 housing units under current zoning, as well as 232,000 new jobs. The report defines development capacity as “an estimate of how much new development could occur theoretically over an unlimited time period,” as well as clarifying how the DPD calculated this estimate.
Image: City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development

Image: City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development

“First, the model identifies which parcels could be available for development,” states the DPD in the report. “This includes vacant parcels as well as underdeveloped parcels. Second, the model estimates what type of development is likely to occur on that parcel. Last, the model calculates the difference between potential and existing development.”

The DPD stated that this data will be used to measure the potential impact of infrastructure growth on the environment, transit, and public facilities as well as whether changes to zoning laws will be required. Additionally, the DPD emphasized that although the capacity to meet demand is present, certain areas may be upzoned to promote “strategic growth” of certain areas, such as areas affected by the addition of the LINK light rail system.

For Capitol Hill, which currently contains 14,219 housing units occupying 1,627 parcels of land, the DPD’s report found that 552 parcels were considered vacant or underdeveloped when compared to the potential level allowed for on that parcel, and are therefore considered likely to redevelop in the years between now and 2035.

If redevelopment were to occur for these 552 parcels, the neighborhood could add an additional 5,431 mixed-use units added in that time period.

The entire First Hill/Capitol Hill Urban Center, which includes First Hill, the Pike/Pine corridor and the 12th Avenue business district in addition to Capitol Hill proper, has a total of 26,635 existing residential units across 2,680 parcels of land. 914 are considered vacant or underdeveloped, equaling a growth capacity of 19,009 potential new residential units by 2035.
Image: City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development

Image: City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development

First Hill has the largest development capacity for residential units of the combined area with the potential to add a further 9,336 units to the current amount of 6,631. 12th Avenue, which has the lowest number of residential units in the combined area at 1,957, also has the least capacity for residential growth at 1,615 units to be potentially added. Pike/Pine, which has 3,828 current units, has the capacity to add another 2,627 units.

However, in terms of employment, the report found that current zoning will only allow for the addition of an estimated 629 jobs to Capitol Hill’s existing employment level of 5,962. In total, the First Hill / Capitol Hill Urban Center has a current employment level of 40,090 jobs and the capacity to add a further 3,186.

First Hill also boasted the largest capacity for commercial development with the potential to add another 1,005 jobs to its existing level of 22,029, while 12th Avenue could add 949 jobs to its current amount of 5,242. The heavily-developed Pike/Pine corridor sports the lowest potential redevelopment capacity for employment with the potential to add only 603 new jobs to its current number of 6,857.

http://www.capitolhilltimes.com/2014...hill-capacity/

[alki]

West Seattle development: Abatement/demolition begins for The Whittaker

ABATEMENT/DEMOLITION WORK BEGINS AT THE WHITTAKER: If you have driven past the site of The Whittaker (400 apartments plus retail including Whole Foods Market) at 4755 Fauntleroy Way SW, you might have noticed the heavy equipment beginning work. A project spokesperson confirms that they have “officially started abatement work,” adding that the “auto body shop on 40th is scheduled to be demolished sometime tomorrow.” Major demolition is about two weeks away, if all goes as planned, and construction is set to start next month.

http://westseattleblog.com/2014/10/w...rebuild-notes/

[mhays]

Hot damn. That's sort of a gateway to the Junction, and 400 units is nothing to sneeze at either. I have no idea how many units have been built or are underway in the current flurry, but it must be in the four figures by now.