RUMOR HAS IT THERE WILL BE A NATIONAL RESTAURANT CHAIN AND A GIANT ATT STORE.

yeah, your nuts.

"The city is very good about taking care of the problem when reported."

"Hello McFly"

Just what have they done?
Besides spend your money?
Besides cater to the 'special interest' groups?
Besides leaving us stranded in a foot of snow?
Besides ignoring public safety?

ok, Periwinkle Popsicle Patrol,
it's all yours....

For all of the cry babies that whine about the neighbors crappy yards. Ever think to call the city? Cars parked for too long on the street. Report it online. Graffiti? Report it on line. Neighbors parking on their lawn. Report it on line. The city is very good about taking care of the problem when reported.

Maria...may "basically" be a apt building..but it has hardly been around long enough to look neglected..my point was simply that there are so many empty condo's now they are now b eing offered up for rent, which often leads to the look and feel being less than if they were owner occupied. Can't really afford to buy up all the property and build a park..and I realize I don't have a choice...but I can afford to have an opinion.

I think anything is better than what is there now, which is a vacant lot infested with bums and other vagrants. However, for once I'd like to see the city force the developers to make some transportation improvements. Like how about adding a right turn lane from southbound 15th to westbound Market Street?

We're all looking for a welcoming view as we tip over the edge of the Ballard Bridge. How about enlisting Henry Beyer's firm, he of international
fame as an environmental outdoor architect, and do what was done across the street from the Kent Activity Center. Multiple uses, a stage for outdoor concerts, places for kids, off-leash for dogs, berms, seating for picnics, etc. All grass and simple walkways. We could raise funds privately or try for grants.

...and a store that sells black beanies, with a prop on the top ;-)

how about a 'bunny-patch' everyone likes bunnys!

ok, back to greed, screw the neighborhood.
Thanks Maria, yes, the builder will do what he wants. I know, and have for some time, it doesn't matter what Ballard needs. Clearly, it needs a few more empty condos, still....

Ah Maria, good work. Now we're getting somewhere.

You nailed it with the choice issue. And if anyone here thinks their voices are not really heard in the process, let me tell ya; I'm from Chicago and you have no idea what REAL municipal government thuggary is about.

And yeah, I want to end global warming as much as anyone; I have young kids and hope they will not have to wear SPF 49 year round here when they grow up.

But people need to stop with the pseudo Green/branding BS and start looking at the larger real issues that are more complex and not easily fixed.

Let's make it a permanent bum camp. That way Ballard could display it's compassion to everyone driving by. What could possibly go wrong?

alright, I'm not immovable...'goat-patch'!

Realist you are quite right. But then here in Seattle and in Ballard particularly we LOVE the color pseudo green.

Ec apartment buildings often get neglected but some don’t. Canal Station is basically an apartment building and it looks pretty much as it did when built. If you don’t want an apartment built then buy up all the property and build a park. The issue is simply that it’s just not your choice. These meetings are just to sooth the tender feelings of Ballardites. The developer will build what he wants to build.

BTW is this case the land was owned by the city because of eminent domain but guess who sold the land to build the rest? Old Ballard sold it folks. And they made a lot of money.

Elias, I agree that any construction project of this magnitude should adhere to the best possible "green" building practices you describe that the developer can afford.

Clearly, a sustainable development built on reused long lasting components is in everyone's interest.

That said, if you are truly concerned about issues related to sustainability, you should instead be making the case for a BIGGER and BLANDER condos.

Condos in general are not the most aesthetically pleasing types of housing. But to truly improve the environment in the LONG TERM we need more people in denser urban dwellings close to public transportation.

The best way to achieve this is through bigger developments. The best way to get tenants into these properties is if they aren't priced out the roof because they have Bamboo facades and composting toilets. These are nice things, but they don't really make a difference, sorry. Putting more bodies onto more transit will.

Corn feed beef is tastier than grass fed...... don't think that there is enough acreage for a cow patch. Goats would be better. Ever have cabrito?

Good question LM. I think Hijarta looks nice and it appears that Danielle may be attractive. A condo looks like an apartment building what else do you expect? It's just like townhouses. They all look alike even if they slap a few pieces of wood up and call them a craftsman. They are what they are. Canal Street is cheesy and Leva looks like someone used old shipping crates to build it. I live in a really ugly 70s building with great livability and reasonable rent.

The Ballard neighborhood where I grew up has lots of different designs. There were two craftsmans, a few Tudors, a dump from the mill days, a rambler, and even a split level. Two really ugly mega houses have been added but they are kept well and not an issue.

I kinda like it...but if they can't fill the condo buildings in place now, and the ones in the old QFC on 24th is not even finishedyet...it just may end up turning into an apartment building that gets neglected...

So, I'm not trying to be a pain, but I'm really curious about what people do think is good design. So many blast these condo designs. Can someone give me an idea of an example of good design? I am serious. Pics would help, or links.

“It’s embarrassing that Fremont was able to pull of some cool stuff a few years ago” No Swede Fremont did nothing, a developer did it. Elias it’s not your money being spent so get over it. Whether your ideas are good or bad does no matter and the ideas don’t matter. You don’t own the land and will not be paying to build the building.

I don’t find this building very attractive but I also don’t plan to live there. I have often found my neighbor’s houses to be unattractive but I don’t live in them. Right now my neighbors are town houses which are 20 year tear downs but I DON’T LIVE IN ONE.

Santa Fe is a town where they have strong restrictions on the style of development and as charming as it is, it is a tourist stop. Like Aspen the people, who work there, including state employees, cannot afford to live there. Half the homes are seasonal rentals. I love Santa Fe but it’s a theme park for adults and to be honest few real adults actually live there anymore. It seems most of the residents are rich unhappy people looking to find themselves in a crystal shop. Adults don’t find themselves in Santa Fe or in some pretend idyllic , never really existed, Beaver Cleaver neighborhood with a theme. Ballard is part of a working growing city. Get over it, stop worrying about what everyone else does and live your lives.

..still thinking steak...
Sorry, but we already have a bunch of 'crap throwing monkeys', and we elected them all, they already have great housing.
'cow-patch'
-clicking heels together-

@ 42 I'm still thinking 3 story Monkey Villa!

I'm thinking cow-patch, plenty of room, and no reason to mow ;-)

Black Heli noted: "Could someone ask them to tear down the house inside the fenced area where Dennys was? It’s just one more place that transients and Meth dealers are living. Grass for now would be fine."

Couldn't agree more. I know it would cost a few bucks a month to mow the lawn and pick up the beer cans, but it would go a ways toward easing any community hostility while we wait for the developers to break ground.

the public in general is really at odds with one another. some of you want to 'soften' the corner with more open space and lanscaping. others argue that a hard sidewalk edge will better deter homeless hangouts and druggies.
this will never be a great intersection to 'hang out'. it's just too busy with vehicle traffic.
as long as they're putting commercial/retail at ground level I don't care what's above it. although I prefer to avoid some kitchy symbol of nordic heritage.

Thanks uptown, that is a fool. My concern is public safety.
Last night, just after dark, the police were summoned to that very intersection, 15th and Market, based on reports of a man exposing himself, attacking with feet and hands several moving vehicles, while in traffic!
The following sounded like something out of a movie via the scanner. Officers requesting transportation for one extremely combative individual, already in cuffs and leggings, for a spit sock, and a football helmet. No kidding.
Can you say 'meth-psychosis'?
Sorry couldn't resist.

The basic problem is that it is too big for the site-There is no architectural way to disguise that huge of a building in that location. A smaller funky condo with some trees and landscaping around it would go a long way toward softening that corner. Look how well the condo in fremont next to peets works-its adds detail to the street-supports retail that people actually use and makes that corner a desirable destination. That is the urban village concept in a nutshell-not how many people can you squeeze into a small space....

@ 36 its been observed by others that it would be a better location for a bus terminal!

Who was the fool that thought this was a good location for residential? Busiest traffic intersection in Ballard, across from a Fire Station and two gas stations.

Ok, more seriously. I live in 2003 townhome done in a arts and crafts revisted style. I like it but as a concept, its done. Time to move to something new.

At that intersection, why is there not more ephasis on something that looks much more Norwegian? Could they not dress this building up in some sort of faux Stave dressing, or perhaps hire a real scandinavian firm to do something really ground breaking ( as a people scandinavia is not at a loss in this department). As it is, this design is no improvement over a bombed out denny's drug lot.

Practicing Swede, the apartment building in Fremont that you mentioned was a huge controversy (and still is) when it was being built. No matter what is built there, it will be hated by half the people. Taste is subjective.

Architects had shown a much more innovative design to various groups along with this red brick tower version. The " community " surveyed apparently chose red brick over innovative. The group I was with preferred the other which was kinds way out there but would have been eh noticed.

I love how everyone believes Ballard is full of beautiful buildings with exception of those completed in the last 5 years. Either many of you are completely missing the countless 80's cheap stucco aesthetic multifamily projects or you truly embrace them (sadly).
This being the internet, everyone reaches for the pitchfork before thinking.

@Realist:

I'm not advocating anything that in the long run would be cost ineffective. Smarter architecture, smarter building systems, and decentralized utilities are in all likelihood the wave of the future. Not because they're pie-in-the-sky utopian but because they cut down on waste, which saves energy and resources, and therefore saves money. The up-front costs of such things are indeed usually higher, but if one is going to build a building, one would be smart to build it with the long-term in mind, and in the long-term things like this will end up costing us less. If anything, it's utopian to think we can get away with continuing to construct wasteful, dead trend-riding cookie-cutter buildings in the long run.

Why spend thousands of dollars on a water bill needlessly cycling hundreds of thousands of gallons of water through a building when you could install a greywater filtration system and reuse some of it? Why run up a heating/cooling/electrical bill when a more well thought-out structure needs less heating, less A.C., and less lighting? Why pay for sewage to be sluiced away with thousands of gallons of valuable potable water when a correctly-managed compost system produces safe, nutrient-rich (ie highly marketable) soil and fertilizer? Why pay millions of dollars to renovate the building over and over again through its lifespan if durable, quality construction and intelligent use of materials means that it lasts several hundred years and ages gracefully? All of those things sound long-term cost-effective to me; if I'm wrong, someone please correct me.


Why build yet another bland rampart of condos soon-to-be-turned-into apartments when a high-quality, high-publicity, groundbreaking, -surrounding-property-value-increasing- development could go in its place? I am well aware that all developers are not evil. Did I not advocate working and communicating with the ones who own this property? I am not anti-development, and I am not anti-profit. But on first glance this development looks like it thinks it's riding a wave that actually broke on the beach last fall. The consequences of short-term-profit-oriented, cheaply executed development are becoming painfully clear all around the country. I don't know for sure whether this project is of the same kind, but given the origin and attributes of the first-round design and given the look of the thing this time around, it certainly looks that way.

I don't pretend to know for sure whether a lot of the things I tossed out there are good ideas or not, but I think it's a conversation that's worth having with each other and with developers. Being shortsighted now will come back to haunt us later. Taking the long view might just pay back big.

the architect is just the developer's pawn.

check.

What this project really needs is a new architect.

I for one think we should build a giant three story monkey villa suitable for about 100 primates. I'm sure all their shit throwing would make the corner more desirable.

St. Elias, I'm with you. There's nothing at all inspiring or interesting about this building. It's embarrassing that Fremont was able to pull of some cool stuff a few years ago and we're looking at a proposal that looks like a mid 1996 Senior Center. This intersection is the face of Ballard. Give me matching Marble Viking statues....Or something made of wood. Not another indistinguishable monstrosity.

Could someone ask them to tear down the house inside the fenced area where Dennys was? It's just one more place that transients and Meth dealers are living. Grass for now would be fine. Another Meth house, to add to the collection, we don't need. Thanks

Just build something there already. I'm sick of the "avoid corner" that block has become. It's a sign of what could easily happen if Ballard takes a turn for the worse (and I'm not referring to an infestation of yuppies as "worse").

Well, I'm no designer, but it sure looks like there is plenty of room for improvement. All in all I hope they go ahead with the project, it beats the junkyard that it is now.

I must say, I agree with "tired". A sofa on the front porch? Try a motorcycle. And are front yards really parking lots? I could go on. Don't people want their neighborhoods to look nice?

Ever been to the p-patch two blocks away from this intersection? The one on 14th next to the Safeway? It's sort of a mess, what with the litter and empty beer cans all around (and in) it.

What is the ballard feel you ask?
let's start with red brick. ultra-durable as someone requested!

what else? how about good design! most of the rallying cries have been about the building's aesthetics--that it looks like a villa or prison.
you could have : roof gardens, grey-water systems, composting toilets, etc. and it could look exactly as it's portrayed in the rendering.

sure it's kind of hokey looking, but in terms of scale and urban fabric, this building is right-on. we need 'background' buildings that smush people in. give me density or give me death.

Well, in fairness, I'm going to say I'm glad that the 'architects' reviewed their design, and put the thing right up to the edge of the property.

It looked way too much like a 'homeless hang' with plenty of area to 'stash' their stuff before.

I worked downtown in a high rise, near pioneer square, being remodeled for AAA office space. Not only was my truck and tools burgled numerous times in a very short period of time, you could always look out the window to see some idiot shooting up in the ally below.

I think that the community should make this a p-patch. At least for the years that it will be a graffiti ridden eyesore. We could produce something there, in fact, donate all excess food to the food bank.

on the lighter side, the market is up 500 points today, can anybody dare say 'another bubble'?

It's gonna be empty until its a condo Elias. Get over it. What you want is not the concern of the developers unless you plan to buy a condo and I doubt you do. Most condo buyers want generic granite and stainless and over time they will find a few buyers and eventually renters. Crazy and groundbreaking costs too much and unless you happen to own this property “let’s” is not going to do anything. If you want to design what’s built then I recommend saving your pennies and buying the land.

LMAO can you define for me the Ballard feel? Is it possible that you and I might actually feel alike? To which east are you referring? Spokane? New York? Iraq?

Could some one explain to me what the "Ballard feel" is? Because it looks to me like it's empty abandoned buildings, and bus stops that are used more by intoxicated homeless then commuters.

St. Elias, you say "The possibilities for what we could do with this spot temporarily are near-endless. "

Ah, wrong. They are ended by the costs associated with all your possibilities. I'm no fan of uninspired architecture and empty storefronts either. But I'm sorry, unless you are putting your own $$$ on the line for composting toilets please refrain from pie-eyed utopian dreams for what is simply a mundane intersection in need of housing.

Iconic, landmark stuff? Great!! All for it. Call the icons and landmark creators. All developers are not evil. In fact, i'm pretty sure that without them, they would develop somewhere else farther away causing longer commutes, and more carbon to arise into the atmosphere, no?

@ 16 they should call it the Belle View, on the East Side of Ballard!

Really! OMG... this is just plain and boring. This type of design just destroys the Ballard feel! THIS IN NOT THE EAST!

@ st. elias - you are right in every way, shape, and form in your posting. Please PLEASE attend tonight's meeting and present this intelligent and forward-thinking argument.

I can't attend so will be looking to this, my best neighborhood resource, for a recap. Thanks!!

Yeah, 'cause graffiti is the classy way to bring a community together for a dialog about their neighborhood. This Us vs. Them mindset has to go.

At least condos don't look as bad as my neighbor's house. I had thought that people stopped leaving ratty old sofas on their porches when they left college, turns out... not so much. But at least his jungle of a lawn hides most of it.

Enough with the faux "villa" style. Welcome home to your urinal cake.
They don't look good, they never looked good. We don't want a Redmond Town Center style getto.

lol, I really wish they kept the "condos suck" graffiti up, they are horrendous looking as usual.

I saw the guy who was writing that. He was pretty brazen about it.

I like it.

Meanwhile, there is a meeting at BHS in the Auditorium regarding the viaduct from 7pm-9pm. Lots going on at BHS tonight!

@ number three - Perhaps we could turn it into an offleash dog park/homeless facility where people don't have to pick-up after their dog, or provide santiation for those in need. Cause there is no way that would smell worse than this building!

Thats right, I said it smells like Pooh!

More seriously, is their no set back requirement? cause it looks like the building crowds the street, how much sunlight can they steal from Market on that side of 15th!

And yes, at this point we should also be sending the message that we want the developers to look forward, not backward. This style of development is part of an era that is ending. If they want to house a few hundred people on the site, great, but let's do something really crazy and groundbreaking.

What about landmark architecture, and/or smart architecture that uses the layout and structure of the building itself to drastically reduce the need for artificial heating, cooling, and lighting? What about designing a building with ultra-durable materials that will age gracefully, need minimal maintenance/renovation over the years, and will still look good in a few decades? What about a building that strives to be fully self-sufficient when it comes to energy, or water, or sewage handling? What about greywater filtering/recycling, and rainwater collection and use? What about composting toilets? What about a rooftop garden, or a community garden? What about a new Sunset Bowl - cheap bowling could be all the rage in weekend entertainment and community gathering. What about a kitchen/eating space that people could rent out cheaply and do big potluck style meals for big groups of friends.

Think and design for the Great Recession and beyond, not for 2001-2007.

Gosh, I was kind of holding out for that white concrete monolith granite slab look. I think that old Soviet Union, DDR circa 1963 look would do very well in a massive hulk of a building like this one.

complete with guard tower LOL.
(seems like a proper place for a prison lately)

Debtors prison?

Why exactly does this look like a maximum security prison????

Given the recent info posted on myballard about the vacancy rates of some other big residential developments around here, and given that things are looking economically dire for at least the next few years, how long will it be until this project is built?

Ballard citizens and the developers would be well-served to work together to do something with this property in the meantime. It sits at a major intersection, and is an ideal location for something iconic, something unique; something that serves as a landmark, brings people to the neighborhood, and drives up surrounding property values.

An empty fenced-in lot does none of that. Of course, neither does yet another "so 2006" big box residential building, arguably, but first things first - if the economy gets as bad as it looks to, that issue may solve itself.

The possibilities for what we could do with this spot temporarily are near-endless. The space has a lot of potential. The trick would be to communicate thoroughly, honestly, and often, and to let the developers see that it's in their best interest to get involved with something like this. There are plenty of things that could be done here that are better than letting it sit dormant for the next few years.

Pheww...I was wondering when we were going to build more empty buildings

gross.