5220 42nd Ave. S.
Developer: 20th Century Development
Architect: n/a
This is a very depressing building.
Really, this looks like class C office space heavily sprayed with textured pancake make-up relabeled as a condominium. We feel like we’re going to hear a dental drill.
We would like to point out that at some time the vinyl sales flags and the plastic Christmas bunting will be removed. Take a good look at what will be left. (Can you hear the drill?)
But the upside is there’s a tour bus so you don’t have to stay home.
Advertising menace.
It will find you.
Coming . . .
December 2nd, 2009 at 11:35 pm
$199K for a unit in that motor coach? You people outside the Beltway really know how to live.
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:22 pm
Your website started off with clever posts making fun of profit-seeking developers, but now the content just reeks of elitist editorials making fun of people’s homes. Not all people have, nor can afford to, live in buildings that live up to your standards. I grew up in Seattle and while I believe not all new development has brought aesthetic value to neighborhoods, I am happy that buildings like the Columbia City condos are helping to supporting affordable density throughout the city.
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:01 pm
What, no comments yet from the high density advocates? There’s room in that parking lot for at least fifty more units… Then we can fill all the seats in the bus.
December 6th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
$199,000 is NOT affordable. I’m tired of the idea that it is somehow okay to ask for tons of money for a half-baked conversion. There are many fantastic neighborhoods in Seattle, Columbia City amongst them, and it is NOT good to say yes to unsightly buildings in the name of affordable development. Affordable doesn’t have to assault the senses. Remember, these buildings are going to be around for a while. It’s good to hope (and agitate) for better.
Re Pem: People make their homes inside a variety of building, some more horrendously designed than others. A lovely home can exist INSIDE just about any building. Commenting on architecture and the EXTERIOR everyone will have to look at for a long time might nudge the conversation towards improved (affordable) design.
December 6th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
I hope that truck also sells ice cream or tacos. I will be screamingly disappointed if there is no grub in there!
January 10th, 2010 at 10:33 am
Sorry Pem. I have seen Section 8 housing in CT and in the metro DC area which is MUCH nicer than this depressing dump. Hell, Red Roof Inns have more cheer than this place.
February 20th, 2010 at 10:24 pm
Holy crap!!! This looks like an Aurora Ave crack motel redo.
March 30th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
You guys are a bunch of snooty, full of yourself, egomaniacs. I would like to see what you live in, and better yet how you decorated the inside space.
April 4th, 2010 at 12:06 pm
But look on the bright side–people who are upside down in their condos can move onto the bus!
May 19th, 2010 at 10:50 pm
The Columbia City Condos until 5-6years ago were very low rent apartments for working poor families in the RV. (They were 3 complexes before). Not the lap of luxury but acceptable shelter for people who didn’t have much choice where to live. Since they were bought and converted to condos and rehabed on the cheap, they’re empty or rented at twice the previous rent.
June 1st, 2010 at 10:51 am
I must say the insides of these condos are quite nice. However even if I had the money, no way would I spend $200,000 on this. I don’t see what’s so great about Seattle? I was there in 1999. Vanc BC much nicer. To my buddy from Seattle I’m not hating on your city.
November 12th, 2010 at 7:47 pm
Why am I not surprise to see un-informed, snarky and elitist comments coming from (north of I-90? white?) people who so glibbly quip about what they consider “ugly” architecture, and bemoan that there just was “no effort” made by developer to make this building “architecturally interesting.” What I’d like to know is what are you whiners DOING to create and develop examples of beautiful, architecturally interesting and affordable housing, especially in the neighborhoods south of I-90? Absolutely nothing. (Bitching and moaning doesn’t count.) It makes the shallow, vapid complaints and judgments aired about this building, and others on this site, difficult to take seriously.
Here’s what you don’t see when you pass by (and pass judgment on) the so-called “architectural abortion” that I live in: the developer is helping to get first-time buyers into Columbia City, where there are few other entrees at this price-point. Columbia City is a re-bounded neighborhood smack in the middle of the most diverse zip code in the country (according to the last U.S. Census). The people that live in my building want to live here and are committed to the ethic of building community. We are engaged with all of the people who live around and and want to further improve the neighborhood. The owners in this condo are a diverse lot that reflect the neighborhood; younger, older, gay, straight, and all races. The current building is a vast improvement over the grey-stuccoed POS that was its previous incarnation. The condos are beautifully finished on the inside. Have you seen what $200,000 gets you in Seattle? Comparatively speaking, at this price-point, these condos are among the best you can get, especially south of I-90.
In short, I would care more about your aesthetics if they were grounded in any kind of argument more substanital than “It’s not pretty to me.” Unless you can show me what you’re doing to remedy Seattle’s “architectural malaise” I’ll safely assume you’re just another shrill northside hipster with a stupid website to air your angst-ridden complaints to the world, backed with no action, and nothing more constructive to do than make fun of other people’s homes.
Grow up.
February 24th, 2011 at 11:19 am
Considering buying one of these “atrocities”. After a month of scouring the Seattle real estate market for anything under $200k that is NOT a short sale or one block off Aurora and 1/10 of a mile from Shoreline (and there is no way I’m staying in West Seattle), there are only 10 listings available and these places are really amazing by comparison to the other 9.
First off, they took an exisitng building a renovated them. Points for no new construction to all you calling it ugly. If you live in a new building – even if it’s built green it’s less green than if you start with something already there and these have been around since 1960s. Second, no popcorn ceilings, laminate crap, fake counters or stuff generally guaranteed to need replacing in 2 years. 3rd, living in a house is VERY expensive. I would love to, but due to the expense of it, and some of us are trying to live within our means, we are moving into a condo. It is cost effective but not our dream, but that is what some people have to do. The rest of those cheap condos you see listed on the real estate sites right now are short sales. We know, we’ve had our agent check and we aren’t getting involved.
As for kicking people out of their low rent apartments, anyone on this site who lives in Seattle owns any property is guilty of that. If everyone wasn’t so eager to grab the over-inflated values of their homes in 2008 developers wouldn’t have been buying up all these places. But now it’s all so sad for the poor people who have been getting kicked out of their houses and apartments for the entire housing boom in Seattle. You know the term Skid Row was coined in Seattle, right? Your condo was most likely built on the site of a low-income apartment building that was torn down to make way for it, you just forgot…
If you don’t live in Seattle, yes it is true, $200,000 barely buys you a crappy 700sf condo in town. Or you can spend 2 hours in your car each way each day and pay $200,000k for a crappy 1500sf house. Your choice, but you will end up spending more money on gas anyway and you’ll never get the time back. I’ve been here 10 years and I still have a hard time with it.