Downtown building you'd most like to see replaced - Page 2

Capitol Hill · April 23rd, 2011, 05:27 PM

So i was just thinking some morw of Olive Tower. It really is all alone there, with the Convention Place bus terminal on one sode, and i-5 on the other. If the convention center gets their wish, and that site becomes a second convention center, Olive Tower will be futher isolated. Think lots of blank walls.

On a somewhat related note, has anybody heard if Downtown Honda or Toyota have any plans on moving? Don't get me wrong, i think it.is important for Seattle to have the tax revenue from the auto sales, but i think a location south of downtown would be better suited for this type of business.

AzChristopher · April 23rd, 2011, 06:02 PM

I like the Olive Tower and the King County Administration building. People complain alot when we see new design docs that buildings look too similar. These two definitely do not look like other buildings in the city.

image hosted on flickr

I love this one up close.

mhays · April 23rd, 2011, 08:23 PM

Its sculptural qualities don't make up for its dysfunction on many levels.

mhays · April 23rd, 2011, 09:02 PM

Olive Tower would do much better with a convention center than with an open freeway and the big void of Convention Place Station and the car dealership. Car dealerships are particularly bad since (not sure of this one) they often have loudspeakers, park on sidewalks (I sicced a meter maid on Honda once), honk their horns around corners, etc.

The convention center expansion could be designed well and improve the walk on all four sides.

If we ever have money to cover freeways, what a great park we could have between Olive and Pine. Either cover the whole thing or just along Pine maybe. Turn that plus the convention center addition into a great walkway into the CBD.

alexjonlin · April 23rd, 2011, 09:17 PM

Yesss! I think they were talking a tiny bit about studying freeway caps in the Greater Downtown area before the recession, hopefully when the economy recovers that idea comes back. Maybe sell off a couple of the blocks to developers and use that money to pay for the park caps? Also, I think it'd be really cool to do things like this along certain freeway overpasses: http://goo.gl/maps/XSe9. This is in Columbus, they built retail just on either side of the overpass, so it isn't a big expensive cap but it connects the street together.

mhays · April 23rd, 2011, 09:42 PM

If it connected two parts of a retail street together, sure. At I-5, I'd do park space.

sequoias · April 24th, 2011, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomgoggles

Here's another one I think needs to be axed:

image hosted on flickr

Yep...that company should be gone. The repair price quotes are ridiclously high...and it's so close comparing to Honda or other dealer charges.

So, yes I want that building gone and replace with a modest 6-8 story building with retail on the level floor.

sequoias · April 24th, 2011, 12:08 AM

I want that ulgy Greyhound bus maintence building gone, it's an eyesore....I don't know if it's gone by now. I haven't been to Seattle since I moved out in April 2010.

alexjonlin · April 24th, 2011, 01:15 AM

Nope, still there... I'm sure it'll be gone someday though.

meku · April 24th, 2011, 02:25 AM

Half of that "greyhound" block will be turned into a substation for hungry SLU. From what I remember, they were going to demo the whole thing last year - guess the plans fell through for now.

BoulderGrad · April 24th, 2011, 02:26 AM

The greyhound maintenance building is getting replaced with a substation:

http://www.thesouthlake.com/2009/11/...greyhound-site

Doomgoggles · April 24th, 2011, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

The greyhound maintenance building is getting replaced with a substation:

http://www.thesouthlake.com/2009/11/...greyhound-site

How can they make a substation aesthetically appealing?

Also: can Olive Tower be refurbished and cleaned? Or do preservationists not want it messed with?

BoulderGrad · April 25th, 2011, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomgoggles

How can they make a substation aesthetically appealing?

Also: can Olive Tower be refurbished and cleaned? Or do preservationists not want it messed with?

I remember having a discussion about this when the article came out. Its not so much making the substation appealing, but disguising it in another type of building:

http://www.blogto.com/city/2010/10/t...l_substations/
http://www.forgotten-ny.com/SUBWAYS/...bstations.html

Would be cool of they could do this with the LQA substation in the middle of all the Borad/Aurora reorganizing

Doomgoggles · May 17th, 2011, 09:03 PM

Interesting stuff about the concealed substations, Boulder.

And now: a new contribution:

I ride the sounder from Everett into Seattle for work most days, and I really despise seeing this building. It is NOT an optimal location for that sort of fixture retailer, and the building is plain ugly. But what really irritates me about it is that it's SUCH a prime location for something else! What I'd like to see there:

-A plaza/park/square
-Room for additional transit services (maybe a freaking turntable)
-An office tower with sub-grade garage for streetcars or parking.

Capitol Hill · May 20th, 2011, 05:18 PM

I think the Pioneer Square neighborhood would frown on another plaza, especially when the King Street Station is being constructed across the street. The plazas that are in the atra (Occidental Park and Courthouse lawn are not currently desirable places for non-inebriates to be.

mhays · May 20th, 2011, 07:28 PM

More plazas might help spread the drunks around a bit.

But more non-drunk activity would be even better. The area needs more buildings, not fewer. And a mix of activity so the park crowd isn't just lunchtimes.

A few hundred housing units will have negligible effect except on a localized level. But a few thousand around the south fringe of Downtown should start tipping things. 2011 projects should take it a fair way there...starting to outnumber the bums perhaps, but also multiplying the effect by supporting businesses, reporting drunks, etc.

That building is fine in my opinion.

alexjonlin · May 21st, 2011, 07:56 AM

I don't think more plazas are necessary, they just need a critical mass of residential density to get some real street life going. I just walked up 2nd Ave Ext today, it's like our version of San Francisco's Tenderloin.

Doomgoggles · May 21st, 2011, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capitol Hill

I think the Pioneer Square neighborhood would frown on another plaza, especially when the King Street Station is being constructed across the street. The plazas that are in the atra (Occidental Park and Courthouse lawn are not currently desirable places for non-inebriates to be.

You're right...I didn't really consider how many we had. Also: a lot of people have this negative view of places like Occidental park based on visits during certain times of the day. I work in Pioneer Square, and when I go out for lunch, there is PLENTY of good street activity. Occidental Park is just fine...and Grand Central Arcade is a great place to relax. I feel that it would be safe if I nodded off there.

Anyway, there are more buildings I'd like to add to this thread which are similar to the Seattle Lightning Fixtures building. That particular one just pains me every day.

Bel Ludovic · May 21st, 2011, 02:02 PM

Personally I love the King Country administration building, it's one of Seattle's most distinctive and interesting buildings from that period. I also like the Seattle Lighting building - it has a robustness that so many new Seattle buildings lack.

And that helps me answer the question. I know the question is about downtown buildings but I hope you'll forgive me if I widen the terms of the question.

I would like to see demolished a lot of the flimsy, cheap-looking new blocks of condos besmirching this fine city.

I'm not from Seattle (or even from America) but I do like it enormously and I believe it deserves better than to be littered with buildings designed by AutoCAD that look like they'd blow away in the next gale.

Some of the cladding materials have to be seen to be believed, and often there are far too many of them on the same elevation, competing unnecesarily for attention. Fenestration is often a complete mess. I'd like to see less Trespa panelling, corrugated metal sheeting and gaudy-coloured render, and more brick; better solid-to-void ratios; better building articulation, and just more of an impression overall that the current generation of new buildings won't look dated and decrepit way before their time.

The next sentence is probably completely the wrong thing to write on this forum, but in for a penny, in for a pound, as we say! I've got to be honest: I thought the standard of contemporary residential architecture was broadly much better in Portland than it is in Seattle, despite the latter being superior in other ways.

Come on Seattle, don't fall asleep at the wheel. I know that the city badly needs new residential stock as the city continues to grow, but such progress should not be at the expense of one of the reasons for the city's success in the first place: its visual appeal.

mhays · May 21st, 2011, 07:07 PM

London is a good example of several things we need: 1. Long minimally articulated blocks. 2. Focused retail "high streets," surrounded by other streets with little or no retail, rather than retail in nearly every building in too many neighborhoods. 3. More brick. Obviously transit, air connections, etc., as well but that's going farther afield.

I wouldn't put our average multicolored, over-articulated breadloaf over many prewar buildings in London. But I do like many of them visually. With gray skies we need color. Also, most fundamentally, these buildings are absolutely essential infill. Seattle is transitioning (too slowly) into more of a traditional dense city, vs. the spread out western/southern US model. Breadloaves are a huge part of that. Further, by using wood (often 5 wood levels over one concrete) they're affordable to a lot more people, and are helping keep this city reasonably mixed-income.

April 23rd, 2011, 06:02 PM	#22
AzChristopher Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 246 Likes (Received): 3	I like the Olive Tower and the King County Administration building. People complain alot when we see new design docs that buildings look too similar. These two definitely do not look like other buildings in the city. image hosted on flickr I love this one up close. __________________ www.azchristopher.com

April 24th, 2011, 02:26 AM	#31
BoulderGrad Registered User Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 3,362 Likes (Received): 41	The greyhound maintenance building is getting replaced with a substation: http://www.thesouthlake.com/2009/11/...greyhound-site __________________ My shrink once said to me: "Maybe life isn't for everyone..."

May 20th, 2011, 05:18 PM	#35
Capitol Hill Registered User Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,419 Likes (Received): 168	I think the Pioneer Square neighborhood would frown on another plaza, especially when the King Street Station is being constructed across the street. The plazas that are in the atra (Occidental Park and Courthouse lawn are not currently desirable places for non-inebriates to be. __________________ After Monday and Tuesday, even the calendar says WTF

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

April 23rd, 2011, 05:27 PM	#21
Capitol Hill Registered User Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,419 Likes (Received): 168	So i was just thinking some morw of Olive Tower. It really is all alone there, with the Convention Place bus terminal on one sode, and i-5 on the other. If the convention center gets their wish, and that site becomes a second convention center, Olive Tower will be futher isolated. Think lots of blank walls. On a somewhat related note, has anybody heard if Downtown Honda or Toyota have any plans on moving? Don't get me wrong, i think it.is important for Seattle to have the tax revenue from the auto sales, but i think a location south of downtown would be better suited for this type of business.

April 23rd, 2011, 08:23 PM	#23
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,390 Likes (Received): 119	Its sculptural qualities don't make up for its dysfunction on many levels.

April 23rd, 2011, 09:02 PM	#24
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,390 Likes (Received): 119	Olive Tower would do much better with a convention center than with an open freeway and the big void of Convention Place Station and the car dealership. Car dealerships are particularly bad since (not sure of this one) they often have loudspeakers, park on sidewalks (I sicced a meter maid on Honda once), honk their horns around corners, etc. The convention center expansion could be designed well and improve the walk on all four sides. If we ever have money to cover freeways, what a great park we could have between Olive and Pine. Either cover the whole thing or just along Pine maybe. Turn that plus the convention center addition into a great walkway into the CBD.

April 23rd, 2011, 09:17 PM	#25
alexjonlin Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,271 Likes (Received): 87	Yesss! I think they were talking a tiny bit about studying freeway caps in the Greater Downtown area before the recession, hopefully when the economy recovers that idea comes back. Maybe sell off a couple of the blocks to developers and use that money to pay for the park caps? Also, I think it'd be really cool to do things like this along certain freeway overpasses: http://goo.gl/maps/XSe9. This is in Columbus, they built retail just on either side of the overpass, so it isn't a big expensive cap but it connects the street together.

April 23rd, 2011, 09:42 PM	#26
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,390 Likes (Received): 119	If it connected two parts of a retail street together, sure. At I-5, I'd do park space.

April 24th, 2011, 12:08 AM	#28
sequoias Registered User Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Midwest US Posts: 1,601 Likes (Received): 0	I want that ulgy Greyhound bus maintence building gone, it's an eyesore....I don't know if it's gone by now. I haven't been to Seattle since I moved out in April 2010.

April 24th, 2011, 01:15 AM	#29
alexjonlin Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,271 Likes (Received): 87	Nope, still there... I'm sure it'll be gone someday though.

April 24th, 2011, 02:25 AM	#30
meku Registered User Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 985 Likes (Received): 15	Half of that "greyhound" block will be turned into a substation for hungry SLU. From what I remember, they were going to demo the whole thing last year - guess the plans fell through for now.

May 17th, 2011, 09:03 PM	#34
Doomgoggles Unregistered non-user Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Seattle/Kitsap Posts: 740 Likes (Received): 39	Interesting stuff about the concealed substations, Boulder. And now: a new contribution: I ride the sounder from Everett into Seattle for work most days, and I really despise seeing this building. It is NOT an optimal location for that sort of fixture retailer, and the building is plain ugly. But what really irritates me about it is that it's SUCH a prime location for something else! What I'd like to see there: -A plaza/park/square -Room for additional transit services (maybe a freaking turntable) -An office tower with sub-grade garage for streetcars or parking.

May 20th, 2011, 07:28 PM	#36
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,390 Likes (Received): 119	More plazas might help spread the drunks around a bit. But more non-drunk activity would be even better. The area needs more buildings, not fewer. And a mix of activity so the park crowd isn't just lunchtimes. A few hundred housing units will have negligible effect except on a localized level. But a few thousand around the south fringe of Downtown should start tipping things. 2011 projects should take it a fair way there...starting to outnumber the bums perhaps, but also multiplying the effect by supporting businesses, reporting drunks, etc. That building is fine in my opinion.

May 21st, 2011, 07:56 AM	#37
alexjonlin Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,271 Likes (Received): 87	I don't think more plazas are necessary, they just need a critical mass of residential density to get some real street life going. I just walked up 2nd Ave Ext today, it's like our version of San Francisco's Tenderloin.

May 21st, 2011, 02:02 PM	#39
Bel Ludovic Registered User Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: London Posts: 322 Likes (Received): 0	Personally I love the King Country administration building, it's one of Seattle's most distinctive and interesting buildings from that period. I also like the Seattle Lighting building - it has a robustness that so many new Seattle buildings lack. And that helps me answer the question. I know the question is about downtown buildings but I hope you'll forgive me if I widen the terms of the question. I would like to see demolished a lot of the flimsy, cheap-looking new blocks of condos besmirching this fine city. I'm not from Seattle (or even from America) but I do like it enormously and I believe it deserves better than to be littered with buildings designed by AutoCAD that look like they'd blow away in the next gale. Some of the cladding materials have to be seen to be believed, and often there are far too many of them on the same elevation, competing unnecesarily for attention. Fenestration is often a complete mess. I'd like to see less Trespa panelling, corrugated metal sheeting and gaudy-coloured render, and more brick; better solid-to-void ratios; better building articulation, and just more of an impression overall that the current generation of new buildings won't look dated and decrepit way before their time. The next sentence is probably completely the wrong thing to write on this forum, but in for a penny, in for a pound, as we say! I've got to be honest: I thought the standard of contemporary residential architecture was broadly much better in Portland than it is in Seattle, despite the latter being superior in other ways. Come on Seattle, don't fall asleep at the wheel. I know that the city badly needs new residential stock as the city continues to grow, but such progress should not be at the expense of one of the reasons for the city's success in the first place: its visual appeal.

May 21st, 2011, 07:07 PM	#40
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,390 Likes (Received): 119	London is a good example of several things we need: 1. Long minimally articulated blocks. 2. Focused retail "high streets," surrounded by other streets with little or no retail, rather than retail in nearly every building in too many neighborhoods. 3. More brick. Obviously transit, air connections, etc., as well but that's going farther afield. I wouldn't put our average multicolored, over-articulated breadloaf over many prewar buildings in London. But I do like many of them visually. With gray skies we need color. Also, most fundamentally, these buildings are absolutely essential infill. Seattle is transitioning (too slowly) into more of a traditional dense city, vs. the spread out western/southern US model. Breadloaves are a huge part of that. Further, by using wood (often 5 wood levels over one concrete) they're affordable to a lot more people, and are helping keep this city reasonably mixed-income.