National Cohousing Open House Day

Last month, the Puget Sound Regional Cohousing Network celebrated National Cohousing Open House Day with a two-part virtual event. In the first half, Grace presented an overview entitled “Cohousing: The New American Dream,” where she spoke to the benefits of cohousing and provided insight on how members of her cohousing community, Capitol Hill Urban Cohousing, navigate their relationships on a day-to-day basis. The event was then followed by virtual tours of both completed and developing cohousing communities throughout the region including the following:

Skagit Commons

Sunnyside Village

Capitol Hill Urban Cohousing

Puget Ridge Cohousing

Quimper Village

Vashon Cohousing

Winslow Cohousing

The Tours were broken up into 15-minute segments so that each participant had the opportunity to “visit” all properties. During the sessions, each community representative presented the layout and amenities associated with their community and answered participants’ questions.

Some of the participant feedback was:

“Informative and enjoyable presentations. Thank you!”

“Thank you to everyone who helped develop, run and host this virtual open house. It is difficult to fit everything into a relatively short time. Although meeting people and seeing places in person is ideal, Zoom allows those of us not in the immediate area an opportunity to at least get a sense of a community.”

“Thanks to all who put this together. It was very helpful. I wish there were more opportunities to move into established communities!”

If you’re interested in getting involved with a forming cohousing community, Sunnyside Village is currently looking for community members. For more information, visit their website by clicking here

If you’re interested in learning more about cohousing in general, visit https://www.cohousing.org/ and note that there is a National Cohousing Conference in Madison, WI this August.

Strength in Numbers

In cities and settlements throughout the world the repetition of even a passing resemblance between neighboring structures has lent dignity to many an urban environment.  Siena, Italy, comes to mind as an instance of the first order, where the matching architectural qualities of the city define its great beauty. Closer to home, the justly famous brownstones of New York (so-called because they were built of locally sourced, brown stone) are among some of the country’s finest residential neighborhoods.

Yet this repetition can be a double-edged sword. Our ubiquitous suburbia is the most banal of environments, with its cookie-cutter homes and shopping malls, endlessly repeating the same massing, materials, and details, resulting in pure misery.

On Capitol Hill, we too have instances of matching buildings, which run the gamut from those that enhance our neighborhood to those that tarnish it. 10th Avenue East, between Aloha and Roy Streets, holds forth a positive example of repetitive buildings. Architecturally, these facing comrades are virtually identical, with two on the western side of the street and four on the eastern side. I have long been a fan of these six buildings, not only because they are dignified little structures, but because their repetitive nature highlights their individual qualities.

Besides the match of overall form and materials, sameness is provided by the stairs, building set-backs, and the landscaping, much in the manner of the above-mentioned New York City brownstones. Yet unlike them, these masses are separate, allowing for additional shared elements to present themselves, such as alleyways, facing facades, and archways.

The fact that they share characteristics raises some questions that no one of them standing alone could: Were they built all at the same time? Are the floor plans identical? Was there a specific tenant in mind? Did the same developer build both sides of the street? The answers themselves are not really important.  What matters is that the curious uniformity and repetition has some sort of story behind it, prompting questions that enrich one’s experience.

Further north on 10th Avenue East at the northern extremes of Capitol Hill, one finds a striking threesome of buildings that are identical in all but name. Much larger (individually) than the six to the south, these three provide an anchor to their section of 10th that confirms one’s presence in an urban neighborhood.

In addition to being rather handsome, well-proportioned buildings in their own right, the fact that they match, have the same negative spaces between them, and uniformly step down along 10th Avenue reinforces their presence, strengthening the streetscape and sense of place. Though the three lack the additional matching elements of the first example, their more cubic nature and repetitive fenestration lends them an equally strong character.

My favorite matching buildings on Capitol Hill are, actually, the least matching of all. The Buckley and Sheffield apartments, while not identical like the above apartments, convey a different and perhaps more powerful example of the matching theme through their sharing of a rather unique element: facing corner entries. There is even a third building nearby -- an odd-one out -- that still provides continuity with the others due to a similarly high level of material and detail.

Placed within a (very) broad historical context, I cannot help but to be reminded of one Rome’s most famous landmarks, the "twin" churches of Santa Maria in Montesanto (1662-75) and Santa Maria dei Miracoli (1675-79). Back in the day, this kind of intentional design – matching buildings to form an urban gateway – was novel and rather groundbreaking and required a big, urban type of thinking that had hitherto been rare. Unfortunately, such larger urban thinking in smaller environs such as Capitol Hill remains elusive, one reason why the Buckley and Sheffield merit special attention.

The mirrored pairing of the Buckley and Sheffield is but one of their notable attributes, as the buildings’ execution is a step above typical, Capitol Hill apartment building fare. Subtle brick patterning and terracotta trim indicate the higher aspirations held by the developer. A peek into the lobbies through the stained glass windows reveal that equal attention was paid to the interior environment. Though this pairing may be without precedent on the Hill, it is not without descendants.

Directly to the south of the Buckley is the Whitworth, whose detail and material exceeds the vitrual twins across the street. More questions arise – were these three planned together, and if not, which came first? Did someone anticipate the city arriving, and the rest of the surrounding single-family neighborhood never caught up, leaving these three urban pioneers stranded? Whatever the answer, the mere query suggests there may have been some sort of planning in the entire collection, of thought given to a neighboring context and a choice to create one anew -- indicating big ideas for this little intersection at East Harrison and 17th Avenue East.

Despite the above examples, such repetition, use of thematic elements, and uniformity of height, bulk, and scale, has led to disastrous results.. In the case of much suburban development the obvious reasons include the lower quality of design, including the lac of design of the larger environment inhabited by the structures. Probing more deeply, I would include quality of materials,  the use of well-executed and scaled details and thoughtful material interfaces as contributors to Capitol Hill’s fine examples.. Compactness and density too, play a role in establishing the higher quality of Capitol Hill’s matching buildings; yet bad examples are present on the Hill as well, proving that there are no guarantees for success in design and that we are at least fortunate enough to have some good precedents to follow.

The Glen Arms, a bit of Monticello on our 'little mountain'.

I have developed a bit of an M.O. with the posts on I write on buildings on Capitol Hill. Find a building or buildings that pique my interest, find a non-Capitol Hill example to place our neighborhood's edifice in a broader context, and weave a narrative betwixt the two. After all, as Capitol Hill is the greatest neighborhood around -- and there really is no reason to ever leave it -- referencing something from the outside is a means to expose readers to the relationship between those other buildings and our and recognize what trend setters we really are. This post will be pushing this formula pretty far, as it is clear that Monticello was built before there was a Capitol Hill (or even a City of Seattle), and that the basis of my admiration for the Glen Arms is its garages -- leading to disparate pairing if there ever was one. Critics will rail this tenuous analogy as 'oh, too academic -- too idiosyncratic' -- but you've been warned. And you should stop reading now.

Thomas Jefferson's Monticello holds a deserved place on the UNESCO World Heritage list of the world's greatest places. Paired with the University of Virginia campus, they comprise one of only eight cultural (as opposed to natural) sites in the United States, compared to, for example, about 45 in Italy and a similar number in Spain. Rarefied company indeed. But of its many attributes, one has stuck with me for decades and it is not to be found on the back of that nickel in your pocket, and stems from how the lawn (pictured above) is retained by a series of walls (seen on the left of the image), that below-grade create a series of spaces that house stables, workshops, and even a nifty below-grade ice-storage silo (pictured below -- noting the location of the railing in both images will help with referencing the images to each other). This alignment between what supports the earth -- in this case Monticello's lawn -- with what supported Monticello's residents -- stables for their horses, etc -- forms a powerful dialogue between what the 20th Century architect Louis Kahn termed servant and served. It is a simple, yet powerful way of organizing space. In the case of Monticello, the fact that the servant spaces are housed below grade and are also earth retaining brings an even greater depth to this fundamental concept and spatial hierarchy and how even the most basic of spaces provide the realm upon which architecture needs in order to have a meaningful presence.

Monticello Stables and Ice Storage

On our own 'little mountain', the Glen Arms, on Boylston between Republican and Mercer, is one of the many charming apartments on that leafy street. What makes it a standout Capitol building is its Monticello-esque retaining-wall-as-servant-space-holding-up-a-garden design. Siting on a continuous base of garages (unfortunately too small for most of today's automobiles -- perhaps lease terms stipulating  vehicles no larger than a Cinquecento are in order?), the Glen Arms base has a robustness and clarity of form that is extraordinary when compared to other Hill apartments. The rigor of the base, with its crisp platonic openings made of board-formed concrete, forms a uniform datum above which the transition from building to landscape deftly occurs, its servant role functioning equally well at both tasks. And it is this base's role of both supporting the building and supporting the landscape -- while housing uses that support the residents -- that proves analogous to the Jeffersonian precedent.

Copyright 2012 John M. Feit

Very well attended to, the apartment's garden forms a shady and welcome contrast to the staccato of its supporting base. Especially nice is the gardener's care in allowing the garden to just creep over the edge of the retaining wall-garage, providing welcome visual relief. The same level of stewardship is extended to the building itself, which is plain and cubic, much as its base. Even in their similarity and alignment, the servant-served distinction between the base and top is preserved by the former's more basic material and terse design. Above the base, buff colored and slightly glazed brick lend a level of quality and dignity that is in no need of further embellishment. Though much of this may seem obvious and hardly worthy of further consideration, that is actually the point, as it imparts a welcome clarity and order. Further up the buildings, note the retractable awnings on the largest windows -- one of the best passive solar strategies around to keep away the summer sun, and sadly absent from our post air-conditioned world.

Copyright 2012 John M. Feit

Between matched pairs of four garages each, the entry stair to the Glen Arms is well framed and provides a nice sequence of spaces to the building entry door. Above the entry door is a concrete canopy, which, like the garages rises from the earth to punctuate the Glen Arm's relationship to the land.

Copyright 2012 John M. Feit

Copyright 2012 John M. Feit

The entry garden must form a great shady relief from the summer's sun, and an advantageous prospect from which to watch and listen to the happenings along Boylston. Above the din, as it were, courtesy of the wall-garage base that support it.

Copyright 2012 John M. Feit

I would like to think, when cars we smaller, that there were wooden garage doors in the openings making the base appropriate for its urban setting. And though continuous parking access along a sidewalk is something one does not normally associate with sound design, in the case of the Glen Arms, its the entire composition of garage, landscape, and building, is well executed, proving an exception to the rule.