Sandwich boards done right in Pioneer Square

Isn’t it nice when progress is easy?

Poorly located sandwich boards, aka A-frames, next to businesses have always been an annoyance for many pedestrians. They force us to walk around them, they sometimes narrow sidewalks to single-file, they can be tripped over, and in some places they’re clutter.

I’ve taken to moving many of the worst ones to the side, sometimes day after day, hoping that the owners will get the message. That doesn’t work very well, though it solves the problem momentarily and is satisfying.

Lo and behold, there’s an easier way. SDOT will come to the rescue upon request. With great effect.

The signs are rarely legal, according to this City web page. ”Currently, A-frame signs are illegal except in a City-approved district that has obtained a street use permit to allow and regulate A-frame signs (see BIA).” These districts, where A-frames still face strict rules, are Pioneer Square, Broadway, and the Pike Place Market. A City web page about sidewalk cafes says that even legal A-frames must provide six feet of clear space past seating areas.

I’ve talked to some businesses directly, whether they storm out their doors indignant about “property rights” (this has come up twice, related to poor education presumably), or because I contact them. Sometimes they agree to keep the signs along the curb out of the way. Other times they don’t.

That’s when it’s time to contact SDOT. They regulate signs upon complaint. Just call (206) 684-5267 and leave a message with the address and business name.

I don’t know what they tell the offending businesses, but it works! A few days after a recent complaint about two businesses, both signs went to the side out of the way of pedestrians, and they haven’t offended again. SDOT appears to be enforcing the spirit of the law rather than the letter. I support the enforcement-as-appropriate approach.

There’s a legal side to this. I’m no lawyer, but if someone trips on a sign the City was warned about, shouldn’t the City be liable if it didn’t crack down, and the business be liable if it ignored a City request? Isn’t the business liable regardless? (Any lawyers want to clarify that?) Since liability law is often an excuse to shaft pedestrians (light poles three feet from curbs, crosswalk markings taken away, overly wide streets), it’s nice if the same system helps us occasionally. If the sign is a potential tripping hazard in your opinion, the City will enforce the law to protect itself from costly judgments.

On another tangent, some business owners complain that moving signs hurts business. Maybe that’s true for them personally, but overall, we’ll all buy the same amount of stuff. If the signs have an effect, it’s to move some sales from some businesses to others. Basically illegal signs move sales from complying businesses to non-complying ones. Moving the signs should even the playing field for the good guys.

Now it’s time to try the same thing with parking lot signs. King County’s parcel viewer is good for identifying absentee owners, which could expedite the process for SDOT…

The Palouse: No earthquake worries.

An earthquake won’t likely level the Palouse anytime soon, but Washington State University wants to put your mind at ease.

The school has released a two-minute video in the wake of the 7.0-magnitude earthquake in Haiti to discuss what caused the quake and whether anything like it could ever hit Eastern Washington. Catherine Cooper, an assistant prof in the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, does the talking.

A mid-rise planned for the B&O Espresso site on Olive Way.

OK, I’ll admit it. I love the B&O Espresso on Olive Way. It’s not only been a Capitol Hill establishment for 30 years, it’s also a bit of old Vienna right here in the Wild West. It’s the kind of place where I’ve gone on dates, taken visiting relatives, and just stopped in for a quick Sacher torte and coffee.

And, yes, I lament that it may soon go the way of the dodo bird with a new mid-rise, mixed-use building being designed and proposed for that site.

But we’ve got to stop whining!

Over the last few years it’s become a new Seattle ethos to whinge and mope collectively about every new development project that may replace an existing restaurant, coffee shop, bar or bookstore. In some cases, neighbors have even gone so far as to wage appeals and litigation in hopes of thwarting a development, almost invariably in vain. (Case in point: the battle against the proposal for an East Pine Street mixed-use project that would’ve demolished several popular bars, with the result that the demolition occurred but the building never materialized. Result: a vacant lot!)

I’m not any happier to see my favorite bar, coffee shop, restaurant or chocolaterie demolished, but all of these establishments are tenants within a transitory vessel. Unless the building has heritage value (and some do go on to landmark status), what we lament is the loss of the establishment, not so much the actual building.

What we’re losing sight of is that buildings are simply the current vessel for that beloved establishment — or one very similar to it in the future. Take the Dilettante cafe for example. While we all came to know and love that famous dessert dispensary at its old Broadway location, its former “vessel” wasn’t even demolished, yet the owners decided for a markedly ampler and more creative space up the street in the ground floor of the new Brix building — a building, I imagine which had and probably continues to have its detractors because it replaced a formerly beloved Safeway (?)!

The developers of the proposed new building on the B&O site have been very willing to meet and work with the neighbors and other concerned parties. An offer has even reportedly been made to the B&O owner to relocate that use within the new building. I’m sure if he accepts that offer, he will likely be invited to participate in the design development of the ground-floor space. There’s no guarantee he will accept new terms and likely higher rent, but the new building will indeed include new commercial space for a shop, bar, restaurant or similar use. And if not there, the B&O owner will likely set up shop in another of the many vacant spaces around the Hill or elsewhere.

We need to support responsible developers like these who are willing to engage the community, involve their design input and seek to become community partners. There are far too many corporate developer-machines out there that would never deign to be so participatory. They should receive our assistance, prodding and even constructive criticism, but not our opposition and obstructionism.

And I want to make a particular plug for this type of smaller-scale development. While even this project will encompass a few parcels, it represents the scale of development that should be encouraged. While certainly a hodgepodge, the prevailing fabric of the Capitol Hill urban form is still characterized by midrise buildings that span only a few small parcels. This module provides a more human-scale context that we are more comfortable inhabiting and approaching. Conversely, many large-scale developers take on massive sites, often comprising full city blocks. Even with the most adroit design maneuvers and city oversight, it’s quite a challenge to break down such large projects into human-scale modules that creative an attractive and comfortable street environment.

So in cases like the B&O site, where thoughtful, inclusive, smaller-scale developers propose larger, yet still human-scale development, we should do our best to encourage them — not without due design vigilance and participation — even if it may mean the relocation or reconstitution of a beloved establishment.

Now that the rainy season has arrived full on, perhaps it’s timely to expose certain downtown buildings and their owners for a socially reprehensible offense to pedestrians. I am referring here to the growing prevalence of fake canopies.

Over the last year a number of older buildings around the downtown core have been retrofitted with projecting canopies constructed of glass and steel. Some are simple and serviceable, others are quite elegant. Some have been accomplished as a part of Metro Transit’s commendable efforts toward making downtown a better place to use transit. All of these improvements are welcome in a climate that demands cover over the sidewalk during the winter and sunlight in the summer.

However, the objectives of this general endeavor are apparently not universally shared. Whether done by individual merchants or property owners, we are seeing constructions of steel ribs and struts that extend out over the sidewalks but in fact contain no glass or other materials to provide actual cover. It’s quite the mean-spirited trick: What looks like cover is, in fact, open to the sky and, therefore, rainfall.

I have experienced at least three of these architectural cheats. One is over the entrance to Belltown Court on Second Avenue. Although a small canopy, I have seen more than one parent waiting to send a child off on a school bus while waiting under this false cover and getting soaked in the process.

More egregious is the one Third, just north of the Century Square building, which has recently had a handsome canopy added to its west- and south-facing sides. The offending canopy is actually a quite elaborate and costly structure but it offers no glass panels.

American Apparel:Thumbing its nose at shoppers.

The third one I have experienced is at the American Apparel store on 6th Avenue. This structure is really a sign disguised as a canopy, which should not be allowed at all. Here is a prime street in the retail core with a national brand business thumbing its nose at shoppers. How completely rude is that?

I’m sure there are other examples, which I leave to respondents to point out.

I fear that perhaps the city’s land use code does not mention the requirement of glass (or other solid covering) in its definition of canopies – a loophole that should be corrected immediately. If glass is indeed a requirement, then these parties should be sent notices of a city code violation with the associated penalties.

Now, for those who will undoubtedly send me some sharp retorts about how transients or teenagers will gather under these projections and businesses would have to pay more for cleaning, security, blah, blah, blah — save your breath (or typing fingers). Throughout downtown there are scores of glass and steel canopies, generous in width, high enough not to block storefronts and low enough to offer shelter that are not havens for antisocial or criminal behavior. To not provide canopies in this climate and latitude along primary pedestrian streets is either being lazy or insulting.

Besides, why would we ever take the view that, because of a few miscreants, 95 percent of the population must suffer?

Seattle is back in sole control of the top spot in an annual study of the country’s most literate cities.

The study’s author, Jack Miller of Central Connecticut State University, drew from statistics such as newspaper circulation, number of bookstores, library resources, periodical publishing resources, educational attainment and Internet resources.

Seattle was tied at the top of the list with Minneapolis last year. This year Washington, D.C., fills the number two spot, followed by Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Portland, St. Paul, Minn., Boston, Cincinnati and Denver.

The study found that the most literate cities tend to rank high in other quality-of-life measures such as health, safety, active singles scenes and walkability.

The Palm

The $12 billion man-made island off the coast of Dubai is sinking about 5 millimeters a year, CNBC reports.

The island was dredged from the seabed and is shaped like a palm to maximize waterfront real estate frontage. It’s one of several man-made islands that were constructed in the Middle East over the last five years, including Qatar’s The Pearl. More palm-shaped islands were also planned in Dubai.

In addition to loads of houses, the island is home to the megaresort - No, I am not making this up - Atlantis.

Developer Nakheel says reports on the sinkage by surveying company Fugro are “wholly inaccurate.”

Virtual Tourist is once again posting its list of the World’s Ugliest Buildings. Among those selected: Paris’ Centre Pompidou, the Royal Ontario Building in Toronto and the National Library in Pristina, Kosovo.

We know what Mark thinks. Does anyone else dare chime in on Seattle’s missteps?

Hat tip to Architectural Record.

Staycation central

Construction is complete on a 16,000-square foot house in Puyallup that includes a regulation-size bowling alley, racquetball court, a movie viewing room, a raised swimming pool and pickleball courts, according to a press release I got today from Rush Custom Homes, the home’s builder.

The home is designed as a stay-at-home retreat for a family of five, the release says.

Bowling alley

“Bringing this unique family’s ‘staycation home’ vision to life was a collaboration of being discreet and yet innovative in our design,” Gordon Rush, owner and founder of Rush Custom Homes, says in the release.

Laundry and craft room

“Our team carefully arranged the home’s footprint to include all of the luxury amenities and multiple activity spaces desired without falling into an unapproachable or ostentatious design.”

The house also has multiple laundry and craft rooms– including a gift wrapping station– a master suite and a professional grade kitchen.

Construction took 18 months. Rush Custom Homes is based in Gig Harbor.

Cal Anderson Park

Capitol Hill’s Cal Anderson Park is among the nation’s “Top 12″ urban parks, according to Forbes online. Other parks making the list were Central Park in New York, Golden Gate Park in San Francisco and Chicago’s Grant Park.

Cal Anderson got the nod because of its lemonade-from-lemons appeal, rising from a former reservoir. It’s one of six such parks in Seattle. The Berger Partnership was landscape architect.

Read the story here, or just skip to the slideshow.

Well OK, the old Bon Marche (now Macy’s) parking garage was never exactly a silk purse. But it was an example of a form of “moderne” architecture of which we in Seattle have precious few.

The structure’s spare, horizontal lines, curved corner, and exposed spiral ramp were simple, straightforward reflections of its principal function. The ground floor diner and flower shop were also a reminder of an earlier era of needed services that were often tucked into odd nooks of downtown buildings.

© Courtney Shannon Strand

But with the renovation, what we see resembles a suburban shopping mall – albeit in the “lifestyle center” mode. (Personally, I’ve never quite known what the heck that term is supposed to mean. Sounds like a word made-up by real estate brokers to aggrandize what is still a strip mall.)

Columbia Sportswear is clad in silly, knotty, horizontal wood siding that is obviously tacked on like faux wood paneling in a basement rec room. The overhanging “beams” are a waste of good steel, since they do nothing but stick out from the building and vaguely suggest they are doing something that is structural. The multiple video screens in the display windows effectively block views of the merchandise and merely add to the already frenetic atmosphere of the street in that location. This whole composition could sit nicely as a “storefront” within Alderwood Mall.

The white, translucent plastic sheeting that seems to have been stapled over portions of the façade looks cheap and flimsy. In places it is warped and buckled, adding to the paper-thin shallowness of this facelift gone awry.

But the most egregious aspect of this unfortunate morphing is the absence of a shelter for bus riders. Buildings elsewhere in downtown – even in the next block south — have recently been retrofitted with generous and elegant steel and glass canopies. These provide needed protection from the rain during inclement periods while admitting desired sunlight at other times. This project could have made a similar gesture to the streetscape. It seems as if the people involved deliberately thumbed their noses at the bus patrons who use that corner.

The supreme irony is that leaning rails were actually provided. But none of them are located where the buses actually stop. Talk about adding insult to injury.

It would be difficult to find an example of recent development in the commercial core that has been so socially rude and visually clumsy as this architectural remake. One can only hope that a future, more enlightened owner will strip it all away.

And, perhaps, give us a nice place to wait for the bus.