09 Mar Art vs. Ads vs. Boarded-up Buildings

If you have walked around Pioneer Square lately, you will see some small, but positive things have been happening in the neighborhood.

The Pioneer Square Community-funded Mural was just finished last week by local artist, Jeff Jacobson, who “worked closely with the Seattle preservation board and the PSCA to create a mural that would uplift a disenfranchised community and show a pictorial history and feeling of the local area.” To see his blog post on the work in progress when he started back in 2009, click here.

Back in October, SDOT commissioned ArtWorks to design a mural on the construction fence that has been installed around entrance to King Street station. ArtWorks is a great local nonprofit that provides opportunities for youth to create public art. Check out their work in progress:

Another recent addition to Pioneer Square’s “art” streetscape has been an advertisement in an empty retail space, managed by Ewing & Clark. At first, I was entertained by the ad and thought it added a little spice to an empty retail spot. I was quickly reprimanded, however, and told why it was inappropriate.

The City of Seattle does not allow advertisements or billboards that are located where the services are not being sold. Pioneer Square is even more stringent and the Pioneer Square Historic Preservation board has a process for any type of art that goes up in the neighborhood.

You have to first apply for a permit, which takes a max of 28 days to review, which goes to the Architectural Review Committee who provide advice, and finally to the Pioneer Square Historic Preservation Board to make a final decision.

In the case of the 76 sign, it is both an advertisement, and did not have a permit before it went up. I took a picture of the stop work order that appeared quickly on the building, but it has since been taken down and the advertisement has finished being installed. When I talked to Ewing & Clark, who are leasing the building, an agent said that they would prefer not to have anything in the window because it makes it so their leasing signs can’t be seen.

Pinnacle Management, who are the property managers for the building, said that the last tenant in the building was the Phoenix Underground, and in a tough retail market, when they were approached by an advertising agency (not directly by 76), it was a way to break some of their losses for the space.

Pinnacle also said that the advertising agency was in “negotiations” with the historic preservation board regarding the stop work permit, and that the 76 sign may soon be changed. To another advertisement.

The Chief Seattle Club has also added new art to the outside of their buildings (without a permit, I might add), but according to the Historic Preservation Board, they have so many applications to just get art approved to go up, it will take a while before they get to art/murals that are not approved.

Here’s where I think we’re facing a double standard when it comes to Art going up, Ads going up and Boarded up buildings staying the same.

The Metropole Building – what it used to look like

What it looks like now:

To read more about its history, click here. The short summary is that there was an accidental trash can fire in the building almost 3 years ago, and it has been boarded up ever since. The current owners of the building have been fighting their insurance to see if they’ll pay not only for fire damage, but for the costs to retrofit the building to bring it up to code.

I have two problems with this:

1. This is one of the main entrances to Pioneer Square — it’s extremely negative to see a big, boarded up building as you drive to or through the neighborhood
2. The art that they’ve allowed to be added to the exterior is ridiculous and almost worse than just being boarded up (ridiculous ≠ bad art, by the way)

I’m definitely not saying that the art is bad —  it just doesn’t match very well — not with the atmosphere of Pioneer Square, and not with each other. It’s like wearing stripes with polka dots.

The property manager for the building has said that they will be adding more art soon, but I’m nervous about what’s going to be added next and how it will mix with the others. They had 16 pieces of art to choose from originally, and these were the only 2 they liked. Maybe they should have looked to them sitting next to each other before they made their decision.

But the main problem I have with this whole situation and where I feel there is a double standard is that illegal advertisements are acted on so swiftly (the work permit was up within a week of the ad going up), but this building has sat boarded up and a blight on the neighborhood for almost three years — I think that this should be totally unacceptable.

I understand where the advertisement rule came from (city being overwhelmed by billboards and ads), but I feel like they are just as negative as empty buildings with boards and safety fencing.

The burden of responsibility is on both the city and the owners of the building. The city should be able to add more pressure or offer incentives to move this building renovation along, and while I sympathize with the tough economy, the owners should do their part as a piece of the neighborhood.