Much of the most interesting neighborhood news and information on this neighborhood news and information site comes from you in the comments on CHS posts. To highlight some of the best points, ideas, questions, etc. from the site, we’re going to start this weekly round-up of the best CHS comments. Here is what we found this week.

The 11th/Pine development project inspired a lot of feedback and good questions to consider at this Wednesday’s design review meeting. This question raised by CapHillMax is an important one — is there anything to do from a design standpoint to reduce the tension between the area’s existing nightlife and future residents of the building?Meanwhile, we also learned something about sidewalk design and construction and heard from neighborhood activist Dennis Saxman:

Hmmm… by CapHillMax
So while we are talking about preservation, does anyone not see the folly of plopping a residential building right on a street that is full of bars, late-night restaurants and clubs?

---

I’m not NIMBY, it’s just one of the things that makes Pike/Pine a great neighborhood is the nightlife. And infilling with really dense residential developments such as this, plus the one that is being built right above the Cuff’s outdoor patio, plus the new condo across from the Satellite Lounge, the new building abutting the Elysian’s outdoor patio, etc. etc. to me does not make much sense. It would be better to have a 1/2 block buffer or so, before putting in a ton of residential. Residents will inevitably complain about the noise, the city will simply take it out on the bars.

Maybe I worry to much. Who knows. This just bothers me.

This would only be considered preservation in George Orwell’s 1984 by Dennis Saxman
You notice that in one place they talk about preserving the character structure, and then in another place (the drawings), they describe it as “existing character facade shown in foreground to remain.”

 The ordinance, on its face, allows development “to a scale that is compatible with the established development pattern.” That language is not found in either the Neighborhood Plan or the Design Guidelines.

One of the goals of Phase Two of neighborhood planning for the Pike/Pine was to “preserve, to the extent possible, the neighborhood’s built environment of auto-row architecture.” One of the Visions of the Plan for 2014 was ” “The historic ‘auto-row’ architecture and other historic buildings … that give the neighborhood character and preserve important parts of Seattle’s twentieth century history.” One of the key strategies was ” To sustain the character of the Pike/Pine neighborhood by development of Design Guidelines and Design Review process to preserve ‘character’ buildings ….” As part of this strategy, one item listed was to establish a Community Heritage District that would provide preservation incentives and design review for the rehabilitation and remodeling of existing structures.” It also proposed to establish an inclusive Community Heritage Design Review Board.

The Design Guidelines listed, as a high priority, “[preservation] of the physical and social character of the corridor.” While they expressed a preference for adaptive re-use of existing buildings, they also encouraged new structures that reflect the architectural heritage of the neighborhood. Throughout the guidelines is an emphasis on buildings that are compatible and consistent with the existing architectural character.

Unfortunately, these goals have come to naught. Chiefly because a handful of powerful individuals in the neighborhood who prefer the individualistic, vain buildings built according to the futuristic fantasies of Le Corbusier and his imitators – fantasies that have been discredited for decades.

The National Historic Preservation Act defines preservation as including: “identification, evaluation, recordation,documentation, curation,acquisition,protection,management,rehabilitation,restoration, stabilization, maintenance, research, interpretation, conservation, and education and training regarding the foregoing activities, or any combination of the foregoing activities. At least one definition of conservation in most dictionaries is “the act of preserving, guarding, or protecting; the keeping (of a thing) in a safe or entire state.”

As I have stated before, I do not believe the new ordinance will accomplish any of these things.

For anyone who wants to amend the design guidelines or a neighborhood plan, there are established procedures for doing so. I don’t see that any of them were followed. This is just plain wrong.

RE: How about the sidewalks? by Brian
I did concrete, mostly sidewalks and curb & gutter, for five years or so. It’s possible to do some kind of independent sidewalk design but especially when the construction is in an established area, it requires a TON of cooperation from whatever body is governing the area.

A couple years ago the city of Olympia made a big PR event out of one of our projects, it was really cool. They hired us to put in a new compact permeable concrete, it retains most of the natural drainage by allowing rain water to pass through rather than direct it to a storm drain, and hired an artist to work with us while we placed the concrete. She was charged with directing all the aesthetic aspects while we did the actual work. It worked out really well for us because we were relieved of all responsibility if anyone complained about the art.

I think Seattle is a different story. Their standards are constantly changing and if you don’t meet whatever that standard happens to be at the time, your company has to pay to remove and redo the work. Why do you think the city has it’s own concrete crew… companies charge the city more because they’re so nutty. The company I worked for started the sidewalks in Fremont and just cut our losses and gave the concrete work to the general contractor rather than messing with the city trying to do art.

A little long, I know

Our check-in with 15th Ave’s Victrola Coffee (now owned by Whidbey Coffee Co.) prompted this response from user –. 

Whidbey Island Is Not Local by —
Local is an overused term that is really meaningless. My definition only allows for something being one county away.

Based on all of the arguments on this blog against 15th Avenue Coffee & Tea, Whidbey Island does not qualify as local. 

But if it has to be within two counties, Starbucks qualifies as local.

We learned a random — but useful — macaroni and cheese tip from Uncle Vinny:

Random food comment…  by Uncle Vinny
Has anyone had the mac ‘n’ cheese at the Rosebud? I’ve had it a couple of times lately, and I’m thinking about going back tonight. They use gouda for the cheese, I think. Only $4 during happy hour… YUMTASTIC, give it a try.

And we’re in no position to argue with normajean about a potential nickname for this part of Capitol Hill:

thumpers by normajean
I live at the corner of 15th and Pine and will always refer to this areas as Thumpers.

.