Pioneer Square's character is very much worth preserving. Therefore, the parking garage should go.

Ideally, but not realistically, a massive lot like this would be sub-divided into three narrow strips and sold to different developers. Heights would remain, but the aesthetic impact would be less, or 3x worse, depending.

Usually when talking about a historic or 'cultural' neighborhood the first issue is deciding if the existing building or use is a "Contributing Structure", meaning it is itself in keeping with the nostalgic aesthetic that is being put forward. Obviously, while a parking garage is very much in keeping with the current and actual use, it is out of phase with both the nostalgia, and with a new aesthetic of density and modernity.

oh, FFS. the new Weyerhauser HQ on Occidental is 12 stories. that one got through?

the buildings ON Pioneer Square, specifically at 1st and Cherry, are 10 stories.

next we'll see the sinking ship landmarked.

This fight has never been about "saving a parking garage." It's about a bigass, grotesquely ugly building that won't contain any affordable housing in a Seattle Historic District that is one of the poorest neighborhoods in Seattle.

@3

12 stories, 7 stories... but hey, who's counting, right?

Historical preservation districts are inherently arbitrary agencies that wealthy retired people use to impose their will on their neighborhoods when they've lost legislative battles over zoning. This proposed building is 100' high, under the 120' zoning limit for the neighborhood, and includes set backs designed to add light for pedestrians, etc. Which is a silly concern in the first place, given that it fronts on a fucking state highway.

Can't wait to have children so that I can bring them down and show them the quaint old 100-year-old parking garage. "Look kids! Your grandparents used to drive their SUVs an hour from Woodinville and park here!"

Which parking garage? If it's the garage that splits James street and Yesler Way then it should not be mowed down. The site of that garage is the former Occidental Hotel, and then the Seattle Hotel. These sites were where Rutherford B. Hayes, Grover Cleveland, and Theodore Roosevelt had stayed when they visited Seattle. The site itself is rich with local history. The fact that it was allowed to be turned into a garage is awful, but further altering the site would only serve to continue to chip away at the evidence of Seattle's past.

That's the way, Seattle! You're following the San Francisco ideal which is one of the reasons housing is so tight here. You can call it 'preserving the character of the neighborhood" but it really means "I like things as they are and I don't want anyone to change things even if we need more housing--after all, I've already got my place".

But remember, it's developers who are the problem. Not these good neighborhood folk who care more about cars then people in the midst of serious housing shortage. Salt of the earth, these people, and good environmentalists too.

Fucking preservationists screwing things up again! Why do these idiots have any authority at all, all they do is ruin things for everyone! Clearly we need housing much more than what they are trying to preserve. We could put a 50 story building there with parking. Don't get me started o the million dollar pergola POS!!! What does this preservation get us, NOTHING! We need tall building 25 miles around the space needle. Are these preservations funded by some special interest group trying to drive up the price of housing and any available space? If these people keep getting their way we will be soon paying 100 or 1000 a square foot for anything and it won't be because of anything preserved. It will be because it is the only space available. This shit has got to stop. It is absolutely fucking ridiculous that these greedy bastards want to preserve crap like this instead of putting something useful downtown right where it is needed the most.

So, a 12 story building proposed two blocks away from an ultra-modern 26 story apartment complex that's sited directly adjacent to a huge sports stadium, that itself stands next to another ginormous-but-only-slightly-less-architecturally-overbearing sports stadium is "out of scale" with the "historic character" of the neighborhood - and this decision was forced by a "volunteer neighborhood association" with more than half its seats currently unfil…?

Okaaaay...

@10
Preserving parking lots do nothing to preserve Seattle's history. If they built a hotel on the triangle site, it would be a much better show of respect to our history than a parking lot. It would be a return to its former use, and make the neighborhood more like it was when those famous visits occurred.

Ms. Groover interviewed the Save Our Square coalition one time for 1 hour last Summer, and then ditched the story. She didn't follow the story, nor did she attend a single Pioneer Square Preservation Board meeting, nor a single meeting during the 3-day meeting with the Hearing Examiner. After piggybacking on the story of the Seattle Times, she inserted an out-of-content, ignorant opinion on this topic. ...and one wonders how John Stewart made an entire show out of mocking the media. Seriously, is the Stranger's budget so low that they can't follow a story on their own accord? This isn't about housing (though Ms. Groover should consider looking into the monolithic 450 Alaskan Way's Office building, i.e. no residentual of any kind, if she has a beef. It's hard to miss since it's across the street from the building she's supposedly covering). This is about preserving Seattle's history. Pioneer Square is an asset to Seattle. It is our past. It teaches us our lessons and our mistakes. It is also valuable as a significant tourism draw. Does the Stranger really believe that housing (and in this case, market-rate housing--- yay--- thanks, Stranger, for helping out techies & professionals) is necessary at ANY cost?

The garage isn't saved. The project will have to apply for a new approval with a more acceptable design. The garage had long been deemed non-contributing which is historical preservation speak for they covered up or removed all the old-world charm a while ago. The time to save the garage came and went 6 or 7 years ago without much of a whimper. As other commenters have said, this isn't about saving historical structures (the appellants do want development).

Cancel Bertha and we can talk about "saving historical buildings"

This is all about the views from the condos being blocked. The condos at 80 Jackson were given the opportunity to buy the garage a few years back and turned it down and now that the viaduct is going to come down now care. Directly across the street on Alaska between Jackson and King construction has already started removing a current parking garage and building an eight story with 1/5 of the parking and it looks just like the one proposed but the only difference is that it does not block condo views but the views of an office building.