Second,Jon…HUMANS….not birds… should take precedent. I’ve reviewed those plans in depth. Good project. The developer isn’t a political genius but he builds good buildings…attractive ones. And expensive ( pardon that since it appears maney libs are allergic to someone else actually making money by working for it…you know..the motivated self starts who don’t like what’s going on now) ones too. This developer should be welcomed. That is a terribly depressed neighborhood and has been since I lived there for part of college. Yes…right there in that old schoolhouse with 4 others…bottom of the hill across from the tennis courts and under the bridge.

Thrid….new and old side by side. Do you ever travel people??? It’s what hapening in forward ( not progressive…ugh) thinking cities. I’m not sure what happened to that project in West Central next to the Courthouse but what a shame that it was block by 1 single person…just for spite. Now THAT one was how “new and old” complimenting each other should look.

Spokane is funny…when someone has an idea..a project…right away people think of the things ( like raptors or squirrels …I had a deal over red bush tailed squirrels…in Omaha…our side won and actually paid taxes and supported a woman’s shelter) that are tangential to human advancement and can be used to slow it. I revere the environment…..not so much the people who use it as a club to foist their private ideas on people who are trying to help other people and the environment…like a park we built in that Omaha project.

I don’t know McDowell but I’ve met him and his wife. Really good people…just not good politicians with the neighborhood. I hope he succeeds. Long overdue.

This is not an example of “overdevelopment” by any means and nor has the developer purchased a license to do so. Also, I see this building not as a giant monolith but as a very well designed piece of art. It enhances the surrounding neighorhood and the skyline overall. It’s SURELY an improvement over the RiverFalls Tower.

I (heart) PV*
As it is or only with changes that I approve of.

It seems to me that the design is similar to the MAC in the way that it integrates into the hill. Any thoughts or discussion on getting some retail space at the bottom. Maybe a mom & pop grocery store? or a Rocket Bakery?

“I think that stepping up off of the hill is overly monumental for the site and references nothing except the adjacent tower.”

Then you should make an offer on the site and build something more to your liking.

“Oh, also – I neglected to mention that raptors like to hang out near that site, so perhaps it would be best to just not build there to begin with.”

Similar answer. Buy the site and designate it a raptor reserve. No doubt the project (like all construction projects) will disturb some earthworms, wasp nests, skunks, maybe some marmots, and numerous other birds. But this is a city — a human habitat — not the Turnbull Wildlife Refuge.

I think there are larger issues at play than the downtown design review board.

From a massing and design standpoint, the highlighted project in no way speaks to the character or the context of Peaceful Valley. The designer does seem to address Riverside with the townhome portion of the project, and yet I think that stepping up off of the hill is overly monumental for the site and references nothing except the adjacent tower.

If you want to develop a tower in that area, may I suggest moving your site a few blocks back where you won’t destroy both the character of one of our best neighborhoods and create all sorts of issues involving that hillside.

Fail.

That’s what I suspected.

You’re right, George. Democracy has to do with whether to install a merry-go-round in a public park, or set the speed limit on a public street. It does not give you a say in how Mr. McDowell develops his private property. You are confusing private property with public property, and a consitutiional republic with a democracy.

(Mariah, I posted another comment which has not appeared. A glitch?)