Taking butt ugly to a whole new level
Commentary by Bryan Tagas
Those Madison Parkers who were already bemoaning the loss of what they believe was the "village-like character" of the neighborhood now have something to really wail about: these twin duolithic three-story block houses, which have arisen at the northeast corner of E. Lynn St. and 42nd Avenue E. Village-like, they're not.
In the more than four years that I've been writing about Madison Park real estate, only once have I taken an editorial position trashing the design of a residence. But these challenging additions to the neighborhood practically cry out for a rebuke. In my opinion, this development is a rude imposition on an unsuspecting neighborhood.
Of course when I say "unsuspecting" I'm overstating the case, since even before this property was developed there were a few who warned that nothing good would come of the City's allowing two new houses to be built on what had previously been a single lot. At the request of the property owner, the lot was approved for subdivision in 2010. That decision was controversial because of a City rule that allows residential lots to be divided into two in cases where the existing property already contains multiple legally rentable structures. That grandfathering applied to this property (4202 E. Lynn Street), on which sat two buildings containing three rental units:
 |
| The site as it looked in 2010 |
What has replaced those relatively charming 1940's bungalows are two giant stucco box structures, each containing almost 3,400 sq. ft. You can own one for $1.6 million.
Architecturally unredeemed, devoid of street appeal, and sitting like two office buildings suddenly dropped into our midst, these structures might cause even a confirmed libertarian to support creation of an architectural commission with the power to enforce some standard of taste on future neighborhood development.
"Eyesores" is what one neighbor calls them. "Monstrosities" is another term that readily comes to mind. And while the buildings are being marketed as having "contemporary styling," for me, at least, this is not about "contemporary" versus "traditional." It is not even primarily about not respecting the character of the community. It's really about bad design versus good design.
There are plenty of examples scattered throughout the neighborhood of modernistic, boxy structures that many would argue are good examples of "contemporary styling." A possible case in point:
 |
| 2032 41st Avenue E. |
"Contemporary" does not have to also mean "cringe worthy."
This development at 42nd and East Lynn now stands defiant. The structures are unkind, uncalled for, and unworthy of the neighborhood. This is a bad performance from which, unfortunately, we have no exit:
I'm so glad you think this is 'butt ugly', too. Some of these boxes are pretty horrendous. This one takes the cake, though.
ReplyDeleteThis is truly awful. What remarkably bad design and not at all befitting of the neighborhood! Whatever happened to the basic architectural principle of designing for (or at least respecting) your surroundings? Aside from that, aren't there city codes with residential lot capacity limits (even for subdivided lots) to prevent these types of overbearing structures from being built on small lots?
ReplyDeletePerhaps it's a medical office?
ReplyDeleteMaybe we can take up a collection to buy them and knock them down.
ReplyDeleteWe live in a box.
ReplyDeleteLeCorbusier built boxes. He said homes are machines for living.
While not particularly well-executed, at least these boxes don't succumb to fussy pretension.
Presumably they are machines that maximize space and utility for the families that live or will live in them.
This seems like a completely utilitarian response lacking aesthetic sensibility. For example, one time-honored principle in architecture is to consider the relationship between the dwelling and the outside world. These boxes, and hedges for that matter, seem to focus on containment, separation, coolness, at the expense of interaction, community.
DeleteAnd they're matching. How cute.
ReplyDeleteWho is the architect and/or developer?
ReplyDeleteWhen you find out, please make sure to let me know. I'll bring my pitchfork and torch......
Deletewe lost the village setting when we became home to mutiple banks.
ReplyDeleteI'm not good at quoting famous architects, but my first thought upon seeing this "architect's" realisation is a quote from Greater Tuna: "Glass houses!"
ReplyDeleteHere's to the trees surrounding "it" growing quickly and lushly (even though the developers removed a beautiful and large tree on the corner).
ReplyDeleteIf you think that the structures formerly on this site were superior (in any way) to these buildings, I suggest you recheck your esthetics. As neighborhoods age, and houses begin to deteriorate, we should be thankful that they are replaced with new houses that, while not perhaps to your taste, do enhance the property values. Moreover, these two buildings are quite in keeping with most of the condos/apartments to their east as well as with a number of newer residences in the area. And, keep in mind that the landscaping that surrounds these two homes will, as it grows and matures, soften their profile. Lighten up!
ReplyDeleteI walked through the houses recently and they are very pleasant. High ceilings, very nice light, well chosen finishes and fixtures.
ReplyDeleteSheesh, it really shows how shallow people are when someone builds a house that doesn't look like theirs. It reminds me of something else. Get over yourselves!
ReplyDeleteIf 'village like' means being intolerant and un-neighborly then bring on the city! This developer isn't some no-face out of towner, but someone who grew up in Seattle, has a great love of Madison Park, has spent years on the design of these houses and who will be calling one of them home. Ultra-modern design isn't for everyone but it is certainly for MANY. With features like sustainable materials, light conservation, water reclamation and filtration, etc, these houses will appeal to a vast percentage of new home buyers. I hope the residents of Madison Park will relax their judgments and welcome these new neighbors to the village.
ReplyDeleteWhat the builder needs to understand is that unless you are "one of us" - people will go after you with a vengeance. "Good neighbors" such as M2K, Lambright, Blueline, Chaffey, Mankind and Cascade Built have been building "butt ugly houses" in this neighborhood for years. The principals of all these building companies are residents of Madison Park and its environs. Most of these houses have been shoe-horned into small lots and have taken sunlight and privacy away from the unsuspecting neighbors. Where was the outrage then?
DeleteThese new houses on 42nd and E Lynn have been pulled very far forward - closer to the curb than average Madison Park house. By doing so the builder actually preserved some of the light and privacy for the house to the North of them along 42nd.
My favorite part of the article is the "controversy" over the lot-sizes. Bryan, as a resident of a 2,350 sq/ft house, built on a 1620 sq/ft lot, I would think you might have been able to look at both sides of things. Especially since both of your neighbors' houses are also larger than the square footage on which they are built – are they too "monstrosities” as termed in the article? I guess since your neighbor to the East had his house written up in the NYT it is exempted from your architectural review – you termed it “architecturally aggressive” and “bold” even though it looks like a scary windowless bunker/prepper house. So why does your neighbor have the right to build his house as he likes and yet the builder of the 42nd/E Lynn houses does not have that same right?
I realize this article falls more under the “commentary” side of things rather than news but selective bias may endanger your role as “town crier”. So, should our village motto should be:
"Madison Park - where familiarity breeds excuses"
or
"Madison Park: where the stinging slap from a neighbor should hurt less than one from a stranger"
"Once upon a time there was a Little House way out in the country. She was a pretty Little House and she was strong and well built. The rosy-pink Little House, on a hill surrounded by apple trees, watches the days go by, from the first apple blossoms in the spring through the winter snows. Always faintly aware of the city's distant lights, she starts to notice the city encroaching on her bucolic existence. First a road appears, which brings horseless carriages and then trucks and steamrollers. Before long, more roads, bigger homes, apartment buildings, stores, and garages surround the Little House. Her family moves out and she finds herself alone in the middle of the city, where the artificial lights are so bright that the Little House can no longer see the sun or the moon. She often dreams of the field of daisies and the apple trees dancing in the moonlight."
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of new construction, does anyone know what is being built in Canterbury on Crockett (where it meets 38th Ave E). Are they putting 2 houses on the lot? Also, on 40th (between Blaine and Newton)?
ReplyDelete