Ever fearless "Anonymous" posted a comment in reaction to my last post:
#2 expanding the landmark district?
This makes no sense. What are the historically significant buildings you want to include?Revisit this
"The Columbia City Application Review Committee and the City of Seattle Landmarks Preservation Board are charged with maintaining the historic character of Columbia City, ensuring that the architectural integrity and aesthetics of the buildings and landscape are preserved."
Yes, yes, ok, technically you're correct. If I was going for historically appropriate buildings (or even just more age-appropriate buildings) I suppose I would have suggested areas even further south, perhaps near Orcas. However, the basic point I was making is simple: the landmark district, from a business point of view, is a raging success. We should be encouraging further business development and revival along Rainier Ave further south, not encouraging the business zone to "widen" into the neighborhood. Ideally the business development aspects should be completely separate from the landmark district preservation efforts, but unfortunately they're closely intertwined in Columbia City.
The problem arises because the Columbia City Business Association only encourages business within the landmark district. See this proposal for an example of how they think -
It has been a key goal of the Columbia City Business Association to "widen" the district by promoting commercial activity up the commercially-zoned side streets, east and west of Rainier Avenue. The existing historic-style pedestrian lighting is very important in defining the business district and supporting its landmark status.
So if the only way to get the support of the business association for more development along Rainier (as opposed to moving into the residential areas) is to enlarge the landmark district, then so be it.
Anonymous also made the point of density (which yes, Seattle desperately needs more of) and a strategy for businesses along the light rail line so whatever develops there doesn't cannibalize Columbia City. So far, judging from the development that's taking place near MLK & Alaska, we're getting the residential density without any extra commercial zoning, which is perfect. But I wonder if the business association has a plan for how to link the light rail stop with Columbia City?
Perhaps, if they're really really intent on turning residential areas commercial, they could work on having Alaska between Rainier and MLK zoned commercial and added to the landmark district? I'd love to see shops from Lucille all the way up Rainier to Alaska, and from there to the light rail stop. I'm sure all the people moving into those developments along MLK would like that too.
2 comments:
This topic is right on, Captain. How should our neighborhood center grow?
I think this has been a longstanding Columbia City discussion, and you and I are relative newcomers to it.
--> It was a focus of neighborhood planning in the mid ’90s, resulting in rezones at the edges of the business district. So as neighbors, that’s out of our hands until the next neighborhood plan: i.e. not for awhile.
--> Location of new development isn’t really our call either, except for those of us who have a developer’s drive and a line of credit to match.
But the topic is worth revisiting, because neighbors can be positioned to affect how proposed new developments fit in. Those specifics are what make Columbia City such an amazing living space. And new development is on the way.
You talk about two different motions -- extending the business district along Rainier and deepening it into the side streets. They’re not mutually exclusive, and I think there’s some difference of opinion about how they should play out.
The Columbia City Landmark District does many things. Mostly I think it helps to protect the fine pedestrian scale that grew organically out of a little town once located at a stop on the electric streetcar line. We’re lucky to live in a place where conditions were once right to organize and build a community like ours. The classic features of the landmark district provide critical cues for future development, but I don’t think that extending the district boundaries will make that development more likely.
In Columbia City, the side streets along Rainier are really important –- they nurture the main pedestrian way. Bike Works, Soreano’s, Hillside Family Dentistry, the Parcel & Post, Salon Adidez, Shola Grocery, and and now all the newly installed small businesses in the Edmunds St lofts. They’re all businesses that add vitality without necessarily being the most intensive storefronts or needing heavy foot-traffic. The same can be said for second-story offices along Rainier.
I think the conversion of the Greater Revival Church to restaurant space (the Magellan building on Ferdinand) was nothing less than a stroke of neighborhood design genius. Pete Lamb deserves some real credit. He took a building that was largely closed to the sidewalk and has opened it up, providing lots of pedestrian interest and vitality.
Along Rainier, there are some obvious gaps that need our collective attention. Rainier Plaza is the most critical, and there are others. How cool would it be to better connect the Hudson-Edmunds core with the library, Columbia Park and Rainier playfield? That’s going to be a big design challenge, with three very important facades and no optimal place to put the vehicle and service entries.
Saint Gobain’s development near Rainier and Hudson should provide for that same side-street sidewalk interest, especially on the south side of Hudson. But their site doesn’t front on Rainier, which seems to limit design flexibility for future growth of pedestrian retail south of Hudson. Without alleys, today’s buildings need driveways across the sidewalk, which mess up the ideal pedestrian scale we love in Columbia City.
Some neighborhood leaders subscribe to the idea that Columbia City is part of a “string of pearls”, which fits with the pattern of stops along the original streetcar line. I think there are opportunities to extend the edges of the commercial district, particularly once the center is doing so well. I’m sorry that the last round of neighborhood planning endorsed provisions that allow residential apartments to be built at the ground level along Rainier, because I think that too often results in closed curtains where there should instead be active and interesting shop windows.
As new sites develop, each project presents us with a chance to weigh in about how it should engage with our neighborhood. There are important design choices that can nurture and support what everyone recognizes as a successful pedestrian-scaled district. We need to be deliberate about it and proactively formulate our priorities. We'll be living with these new buildings for a long time.
The way Rainier Avenue develops over the next decade will be enormously significant to everyone living here. The nature of the current strip commercial zoning along the length of Rainier opens the door to the possibility of an undifferentiated, auto-dependent strip development (think Aurora Avenue). What makes us different and what offers hope is that Rainier Avenue is home to a series of distinct, rather evenly-spaced neighborhood-scale commercial districts that grew up in the street car days: Genesee, Columbia City, Hillman City, Graham, Othello, Rainier Beach. Some are in better shape than others, but all offer some good, older building stock and a distinct sense of place. Being about a half mile apart, these compact business nodes, after some revitalization, can each serve their surrounding residential neighborhoods. In this scenario, walking becomes an option to getting in the car, and running into your neighbors at the corner coffee shop/pub/cafe becomes a daily event.
This isn't to suggest that development shouldn't happen along the intervening reaches of Rainier between the business districts. But the development in these reaches should be residential, office and professional; neighborhood retail uses would be concentrated in the business districts.
In this scenario, Rainier would connect a series of small, distinct neighborhood-scale business nodes, rather than be another auto-oriented strip development.
Post a Comment