Genuflecting to the high rises
Let's not get too giddy and forget to examine these supposed architectural marvels – before they're built.
We've been treated, if that's the word, to two recent examples of architectural hype. That's when a developer gives a newspaper an exclusive about a socko new project, complete with handsome drawings that obscure what the project will really look like. The newspaper obligingly cheers right along.
The public, later when it's too late, gets upset.
A classic example appeared in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, which on Tuesday, Feb. 12, fronted the business section with announcement of two hotel-condo towers planned for across Fifth Avenue from the Westin's two "corn-cob" towers. We get a shower of superlatives: $900 million, according to the New York financiers, 550 feet tall, 200 hotel rooms, and 400-500 condos.
But not to worry: These massive buildings will be "designed for neighborhood," meaning shops along the streetfront. The developers, with the engaging name of Hummingbird Advisors, are going to take a pretty dead block and "make it into a vital, vibrant pedestrian area." Of course, much of the lower level will be a blank wall concealing hotel ballrooms, but that's OK because the Monorail already blocks those views. (The architects' drawing artfully turns the Monorail into gossamer.)
Feeling patronized? There's more. Ishmael Leyva Architects of New York was chosen as architect "not because we don't like Seattle designers, but becasue we feel Seattle is ready for something that's more edgy, more 'out there,'" according to Alec Carlin, who appears to be chief Hummingbird. Leyva is a Mexican-born celebrity architect who specializes in high-end work, such as Meryl Streep's Tribeca apartment, and outsized amenities. This is going to be a very New York kind of project, like much of downtown Seattle.
The other example, in The Seattle Times on Monday, Feb. 11, was the slightly less breathless announcement of a faceted glass office tower at Fifth Avenue and Columbia Street, looming over the rescued United Methodist Church. A lovely drawing makes the tower look slender and almost transparent.
In fact, it's huge, at 660 feet, far taller than the 33-story building the church once proposed for the site or the 450-foot zoning allows. But not to worry: It's slender at the bottom and all that reflective glass is said to be "genuflecting" to the old church. A pretty intimate genuflection, it would appear, since the building widens out and hangs over the adjoining old church and nearby Rainier Club. The article says it comes within four feet of touching the top of the sanctuary roof. Architects in this case are the respected Portland firm of Zimmer Gunsul Frasca, and Nitze Stagin is the local developer.
The developer deserves credit for coming up with a scheme to save the old sanctuary (no uses have yet been found), but one wonders at the tradeoffs. A few years hence, if not already, we are going to wonder why downtown Seattle has become such a lightless, windswept, glassy canyonlands. But more vibrant? The office tower will be mighty quiet evenings and weekends. And the amenities of the new condo-hotel towers (open-air arboretum, lots of recreation space) may turn these abodes of "urban aspirationals" into self-contained zones.
Few questions are asked, at least in time to change things. The reason for all this genuflecting is the alliance of environmentalists, enchanted by the density created; developers eager to cash in on Seattle's "underpriced" real estate market; low-income housing advocates, who get millions in mitigation payments from these luxury towers; and City Hall, salivating over the tax receipts.
But now there is some sign that the ecodensity coalition is beginning to feel some internal splits. A good illustration is Vancouver, B.C., where residents are grumbling that the amenities supposed to make all this density tolerable (libraries, transit, affordable apartments) are just not showing up.
Now they tell us!
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Comments:
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 7:04 a.m. inappropriate
Rainier Club dwarfed by 5th and Columbia: Take a look at how the Rainier club will be dwarfed by the proposed 5th and Columbia Tower.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seattlerealestate/2262536103/
Is that the new meaning of "genuflecting"?
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 8:55 a.m. inappropriate
"Seattle is ready for something that's more edgy, more 'out there.'" Oh?
"Edgy" is cliche rhetoric for out of control, stick in the eye disruption. When people are "edgy," they get sent to psychiatrists or jail. "Edgy" entertainment usually involves the removal of clothing followed by rolling in some gooey or foul-smelling substance. "Edgy" sports stars either run dog fights or are forced to confess steroid usage. "Edgy" apparel begs a wardrobe malfunction.
Britney Spears is "edgy."
"Edgy" means somewhere along the way you will fall over into the abyss. Buildings like the ones pictured are excellent candidates for such falling. Anyone care to help push?
If the Seattle skyline is to resemble something out of a bad sci-fi flick, how soon before Jabba the Hut becomes mayor? Oh...wait...to listen to some, hasn't he already? The resemblance is uncanny in more ways than one, and if these two projects see the light of construction day, the resemblance will be a step closer to reality.
The Piper
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 9:11 a.m. inappropriate
Stop the Madness: Let's bring back the days when people could tar and feather a sell-out, huckster mayor and traveling snakeoil developers and ride every one of them out of town on a rail.
We're tired of our city being raped, razed and regurgitated as just one more homogenized, condo-canyoned McCity stripped of our unique character, style and gritty working class charm.
Someone should tell them this is SEATTLE--the other coast. (Are you listening Mr. Mayor?)
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 10:15 a.m. inappropriate
Thanks for calling them out David: Only problem is you go way too easy on the Times. At least the P-I had the decency to put their story in the Business section, where readers expect unquestioning enthusiasm for developers. The Times put their story on the front page. And less breathless? "striking" "distinctive" "like facets on a diamond" blah blah blah. I don't know when I've last seen a newspaper let itself be used so shamelessly.
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 10:49 a.m. inappropriate
Looks okay to me: I was reading Motor Trend at the Barber yesterday, not sure which issue - they had a story on this building BMW has built in Germany - it's in that same 'edgy' genre as the new Library, and some of the stuff they are building in Beijing - unusually shaped glass skinned buildings.
History will tell if they hold up, but I do find them interesting and not displeasing to mull over.
One thing for sure though, growth management act or not - the folks downtown aren't pulling their weight when it comes to the transportation costs of serving this level of density.
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 4:13 p.m. inappropriate
How the office tower grew so tall: I'd like to clarify a point about the height restrictions on the Fifth and Columbia project, the one adjoining the First Methodist Church. The 450' height limit in this area was lifted first in 2001 to 540 feet and then completely eliminated two years ago. That is, following Council revisions of the downtown revisions, there is no height limit in the zoning code for buildings in that part of downtown Seattle. So 660 feet, as proposed, is perfectly permitted. I suppose there might come a point where the airplanes flying overhead might object, but for now (in pursuit of density and tax base), the sky's the limit.
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 5:05 p.m. inappropriate
Why not just tear down all the buildings downtown?: Seattle is a city that not surprisingly sees interest from developers. The building that would have gone at the church site might have been shorter but it also would have cost the city something unique and historical. The current proposal allows the developer to recoupe the cost of building by having the middle floors larger while also preserving the rest of the block. Doing so will leave plenty of daylight for those walking by.
The building itself is a good relief from the normal box towers we are used to seeing built while not going so far as the akward spiral buildings you can see in such places as London, Dubai, and soon to be Chicago. It also balances out that side of the skyline by sitting next to the cities tallest.
Posted Thu, Feb 14, 11:46 p.m. inappropriate
RE: Stop the Madness: "Traveling snakeoil developers"
So according to you, these developers are bad,
A. Because they are not from Seattle
B. Because they want to build buildings
The developer of the 5th and Columbia Tower worked with the City and the church to save the historic sanctuary on the site and to ensure that the resulting office tower would not be another boring box of a building.
The Heron/Pagoda Tower site is currently a surface parking lot, an Avis car rental facility and the Icon Grill. To you these represent the unique character, style and gritty working class charm of Seattle? If a parking lot represents the "soul of Seattle" to you, I'm pretty sure I don't want to experience your vision for the city.
I wasn't alive in the 1960s or 70s, but like so many people in Seattle (and apparently on this forum), I wish we could take the city back to that era. Then I could have the chance to walk around with my dad and look at all the unique parking lots and gritty rundown buildings that ooze working class charm. Unfortunately our sell-out Mayor has stolen this treasured experience from myself and future generations and for that I will never forgive him.
Posted Fri, Feb 15, 8:39 a.m. inappropriate
RE: Glass houses that beg the throwing of stones: The last time an outsider promised us edgy architecture, we ended up with the EMP.
Posted Fri, Feb 15, 12:23 p.m. inappropriate
Love the buildings, love the density! Build them.: These are exactly the kind of buildings Seattle needs. Love them. Love them. Love them. Bring 'em on!
Posted Fri, Feb 15, 6:16 p.m. inappropriate
RE: Looks okay to me: I wasn't going to comment on this thread because I work for a contractor and it's too close to "home". But that bit about downtown residents not pulling their weight on transportation is so far off I can't help myself.
Tower residents are doing the city a favor, including our transportation system. A large percentage walk to work (as I do), or take the bus. Even the ones who drive tend to drive much shorter distances -- like Belltown to the CBD rather than Kirkland to the CBD. The exceptions are the reverse commuters, but within the downtown area they're going the less-stressed direction.
Hotels are even better. Arrivals and departures are spread throughout the day, rather than bunched at rush hour. Most of the staff uses public transit and has odd hours as well. The majority of guests arrive by taxi, shuttle bus, or transit. This is reflected by the moderate parking volumes. For example the 1,200-room Sheraton has 400 parking spaces.
Senior Housing is better still. Retirees also spread their travel throughout the day, and there's less staff.
Office towers aren't bad either. CBD office workers are in the 50% range with driving alone, if I recall. That's higher than it should be but vastly better than workers elsewhere in this region aside from the UW.
Downtown residents, tourists, and office staff drive the least of anyone in this region and populate our sidewalks, while providing a strong customer base for restaurants, museums, and other amenities.
If you want to charge extra for transportation costs, bill the people who drive 30 miles a day, or 50. They're costing all of us extraordinary amounts of money, and reducing quality of life for everyone. If you're going to discipline a certain group, why not charge people who live over 10 miles from work, and give a break to anyone living within walking distance?
Posted Sat, Feb 16, 5:08 p.m. inappropriate
AIR RIGHTS?: Doesn't the Rain ier Club own the air rights above it? Or has somebody managed to get them to sell them up front?
Posted Sun, Feb 17, 12:06 p.m. inappropriate
superlatives: Since when did 660ft become huge especially when there's a 900+ft tower next door?
Posted Sun, Feb 17, 7:29 p.m. inappropriate
RE: AIR RIGHTS?: The developer is giving them parking and I believe some other things for the rights to build above them.