Yes, there has been revolution in Egypt. They’re building a replacement for the 520 bridge. Probably going to tunnel downtown, too. And a giant earthquake and tsunami hit Japan with historically awful force. And, yes, a date has been set for the Volunteer Park Cafe public meeting on its application for a change of use to continue operating its bustling restaurant at the corner of 17th and Galer:
A recent dinner at VPC (Image: Volunteer Park Cafe)
Project: 3011437
Address: 1501 17TH AVE E
Area: Downtown/Central
Zone: ARTERIAL WITHIN 100 FT., SINGLE FAMILY 5000
The Department of Planning and Development (DPD) is currently reviewing the application described below and will hold a public meeting to gather comments on the project.
Project Description: Land Use Application to allow the change of use from general retail sales and service to restaurant (Volunteer Park Cafe).
The project requires the following approvals:
* Administrative Conditional Use to change from one non-conforming use to another.
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
A copy of the plans and other application materials are available at the DPD Public Resource Center, 700 5th Avenue, Suite 2000 (206) 684-8467. The Public Resource Center is open 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Monday, Wednesday, Friday and 10:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday and Thursday.
PUBLIC MEETING
A public meeting to review this application will be held on April 25, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. in the:
Stevens Elementary School Cafeteria
1242 18th Avenue East
Written and/or oral comments may be submitted at the meeting.
This facility is accessible. Print and communication access available on request. Please contact the Public Resource Center (206) 684-8467 as soon as possible to request accommodation for a disability.
CHS lists those moments of history and nature’s power not to belittle the situation around Volunteer Park Cafe but to acknowledge that, yes, there are larger stories to be told. We think this little story is important, though, as it captures some key themes of Capitol Hill living: vibrant streets, density, individual freedom, greater good. It also will directly impact the people who run the business and live nearby the cafe. And we have no guess as to how it will play out.
… the vitriol for the meeting, people.
Calm down. It’s a fucking cafe. I live on 1st & Pike and I don’t complain about noisy assholes from the Showbox or the hobo colony there at night, because it’s the nature of the area. Similarly, if you don’t want to live near a caf in Capitol Hill, move to Sammamish or Shoreline and leave us alone.
here we go again….
This isn’t 1st and Pike so shut up and go back to your hobo community.
Huh? Are you going through life scared of your own shadow?
And I don’t understand your comments about the neighbor yelling and “slamming (her own) door.” So the VPN woman was soliciting the other neighbor at that neighbor’s house. Whether the VPN woman was acting calmly or not, wasn’t she still soliciting at that neighbor’s house? When someone bugs you at your own house at a potentially inconvenient time about a subject on which you might have a divergent opinion — sure it’d be nice to stay polite and calm but that’s asking a hell of a lot.
You have never commented before but this story has been posted before. Seems suspicious.
Some comments have been removed for not being in the spirit of productive CHS conversation.
“Since the VPN woman came to my door, i see her now in the mornings when she walks her child to school. Some of the cafe staff and some customers make fun what she is wearing or her hair”
Words can not express how that makes me feel, belittling a woman in front of her child.
Volunteer Park Neighbors hopes anyone interested in enabling the cafe to remain open will not rely on CHS to learn about the restaurant’s impacts on neighbors. Our offer still stands: to support the cafe’s efforts to become a legal business as long as it and the property owner guarantee that there will be no repeat of the effort to expand into a 90-seat restaurant by using the backyard patio for seating.
The latest news on our blog is at http://volparkneighbors.wordpress.com. If you are unfamiliar with how the situation developed, please see http://vpneighbors.wordpress.com/about/
Cliff Meyer
on behalf of Volunteer Park Neighbors
Don’t you mean don’t rely on us ‘solely’ for info? :)
Honestly, doesn’t matter what neighbors think, etc. The restaurant should not have violated their zoning and if they wanted it changed, they should have gone through the appropriate process, and, only after receiving permission, changed their business.
It’s not fair to the neighbors and not fair to businesses who act within the rules.
This is Justin’s sandbox. I’ve never read any post of his that was inappropriate.
As for Mr. Silva, what you’re describing is tone, something easily fueled by the reader.
And it is SOP for many online communities/message boards to monitor and remove offensive content. I work with Amazon and they do so regularly on customer feedback comments and discussion boards, as an example.
Carry on and rock on, CHS.
You would need to remove all comments then.
Ah, Alan just made my day. Thanks
We’re going to continue reporting — and, apparently, moderating comments about — this story.
Agreed! Never rely “solely” on one source! ;)
I can imagine comment moderation is difficult.
The moderators don’t want to moderate so heavily that they impede conversation, but probably don’t want some jerk just saying inappropriate and/ or unhelpful comments either.
Balancing act, I imagine.
As a neighbor of the cafe who signed the pro petition and actually only found out about this nightmare by glancing at this Blog.
One of the things we liked about moving here was the VPC and I was looking forward to the patio too.
Thanks for your tone though. We’re defiantly planning to come to the meeting and believe me we’re planning on bringing friends.
Btw Cliff… This is Seattle… Any business plan based on creating a 90 seat restaurant by the back door through the use of an OUTSIDE PATIO would not be something I’d invest in.
The neighbors taking action against Volunteer Park Cafe seem, to me, to have no case. I live 5 houses away and, in 3 years, have never had an issue.
The garden built at the back of the cafe seems to have sparked this issue.
However, the Volunteer Park Cafe website states:
Our new garden
Some neighbors claim that the newly renovated and landscaped back garden will double seating capacity.
Our permit application with the city does not include outdoor seating in the garden. Claims to the contrary by certain neighbors are simply factually inaccurate. Yes, we may have stated we were considering it in past press statements, but mere grousing doesn’t contravene the actual facts presented in our permit application to the city.
Prior to the garden renovation, the back of the building was overrun with weeds. We obtained permission from our landlord to plan and build the garden, in order to spruce up the lot to better fit with the character of our neighborhood, and be a good neighbor.
Please provide proof of your claim that it is a 90 seat restaurant. Have you been there? I doubt you could get 90 people STANDING in there.
The back garden is exactly what it says it is – A GARDEN.
Please see the Volunteer Park Cafe site for more information but, for your delectation, here is the section you may be interested in:
The neighbors taking action against Volunteer Park Cafe seem, to me, to have no case. I live 5 houses away and, in 3 years, have never had an issue.
The garden built at the back of the cafe seems to have sparked this issue.
However, the Volunteer Park Cafe website states:
Our new garden
Some neighbors claim that the newly renovated and landscaped back garden will double seating capacity.
Our permit application with the city does not include outdoor seating in the garden. Claims to the contrary by certain neighbors are simply factually inaccurate. Yes, we may have stated we were considering it in past press statements, but mere grousing doesn’t contravene the actual facts presented in our permit application to the city.
Prior to the garden renovation, the back of the building was overrun with weeds. We obtained permission from our landlord to plan and build the garden, in order to spruce up the lot to better fit with the character of our neighborhood, and be a good neighbor.
Another comment. THIS IS SEATTLE.
There are 150 days a year with rain and that does not count the sunny days when it is too cold to be outside. The Cafe has, from what I have seen for the last 3 years, seating for about 10 people on the sidewalk.
The seating I recall inside the restaurant is:
- 2-3 people in corner table on left at window
- 2 people at window on left next to door
- 4-6 people at window on right next to door
- 20 people at the main table
- 5 tables for 2 along the left hand side of the restaurant
Bearing in mind that I have never seen every seat filled, the total we have is: 46 people.
This is just from my memory, but even if we allow for a 20% level of inaccuracy, that’s 57 people.
NOT 90.
Cliff thanks for your comment and willingness to talk. I’m hoping that VPN will continue the discussion with VPC, so we can show that, indeed, no back yard seating is in the cards.
For the public, if you have any questions about VPC’s change of use application, you can reach me at zoning@alwaysfreshgoodness.com. Keep in mind too that answering questions is precisely why we’re having the public meeting, so please attend. VPC will obviously be represented, and we’re hoping VPN will choose to be there as well. The Department of Planning and Development will be hosting, so you can use the opportunity to get authoritative answers on the process from the city.
On a slight tangent, I see mention of me in the comments above, but it looks like the original comment containing the praise or complaint was moderated away. I’m not above admitting when I’m wrong, defending myself when I’m not, and generally trying to learn from experience. In order to make moderation easier on Justin and crew, the commenter that had something to say about me can feel free to email their critique as well…even if the comment was too incendiary for here.
Ms. O’Neill: yes, there are roughly 40 seats inside the cafe. VPC also has had 16 seats at sidewalk tables during warmer months. And, before the City put what could still be a temporary stop to it, VPC put seating on the brick patio it built last spring/summer. That area is larger than the interior, so to be conservative, let’s say only a maximum of 30-35 diners could sit out there.
That’s the 90-seat restaurant we still face, from VPC or from future owners. Too big for this residential area, which already sees serious traffic, parking, odor and other impacts from the current cafe, which is standing-room only at many times.
VPC sees itself as a destination restaurant. Their p.r. is successfully aimed at getting mentions in The New York Times. Those aspirations and ever-increasing customer traffic are apparently why VPC’s owners added the patio. In doing so, they flouted city laws and gave no consideration to neighbors like me (a 1x-3x/week regular customer whose family had lent baby clothes to Heather and then Ericka).
Some people who like VPC think the victimized neighbors should accede to “the greater good”: the need (?) of other North Capitol Hill residents to have a convenient, great restaurant with outdoor seating. Our city has zoning in order to promote that principle of greater good, so we can preserve residential areas. Is there any lack of restaurants or commercial neighborhoods in Seattle?
But, actually, members and supporters of Volunteer Park Neighbors AGREE with everyone who thinks a reasonably-sized restaurant is a neighborhood benefit that is far preferable to a grocery or empty storefront at 1501. VPN has always tried to work with the cafe owners on the issues (which also include garbage problems, unpleasant odors and hazardous parking). We continue to offer to support legalization of a restaurant inside the building, as long as the owners abide by reasonable limits and join with the property owner to provide assurance that a future owner can’t drag us into another patio-related zoning process.
So, support the cafe by urging Ericka and Heather to compromise, as the neighbors have already done. (VPC’s application to the city only says that no “sales or service” will occur in the patio, which means they have left open the possibility of patio use.) Then, we can all get back to focusing on more important things.
Mike, good idea re contact info. We are always open to questions or comments, and promise a reply. Volunteer Park Neighbors members are happy to sit down for coffee with individuals or groups, and clarify our position, discuss ideas, etc.
The Volunteer Park Neighbors’ vitals are:
- volparkneighbors@gmail.com
- (425) 298-6575
Cliff Meyer
on behalf of Volunteer Park Neighbors
I get it. You don’t have an issue so no other neighbor can possibly have a problem either…
Pretty selective bias if you ask me.
Cliff,
The cafe isn’t ever expanding. We are already popular, and there are a fixed number of seats. As we’ve said, we’re not seeking a permit to add more in the back or upstairs. We already have a permit for the existing seats outside along Galer and 17th. And even for those, Ericka has made a concession to VPN’s concerns, so they will not be available to customers during dinner service. The net effect being that there is a decrease in capacity.
As for the language about the back yard patio, if we are inadvertently vague, so are you. What use are you contemplating that would not require tables or service? Those are fairly essential components to any restaurant use. The point being, we can be more specific, if your side is equally specific on what your concerns are.
We can keep playing the game of complaining about each other in the comments here, or we can keep doing the harder but actually productive work of meeting in order to find common ground. The former has been done for months, to no avail. We’ve just jumpstarted the talking, and it seems like there is substantial room for both sides to understand each other and move forward, if we can drop the tendency to demonize the other side and feel like victims.
Ericka has said in her public statements and to you directly that she should have found out the zoning particulars sooner. She’s made concessions to your side as well on outdoor seating, and is willing to give you assurances about future operations.
So what will it be? Perpetually aggrieved victims in the comments? Or do we keep meeting and work things out?
Maybe VPC should hire a public relations person. They sure could use one.
Well, for sure that will be a very lively hearing on April 25th! Hopefully, the involved parties will remain civil, and DPD staff will moderate to keep emotions in check. I wonder whether DPD knows what kind of a hornet’s nest they have gotten themselves into?
Yes, because there is no better use of the cafe’s resources, than to hire a PR person to respond to every anonymous comment troll, right “public”?
There are better forums to make our case to DPD and our neighbors, and your piercing insight aside, we choose to pursue those.
It would be better than you responding to every comment on this blog. There isn’t much difference between a troll and your responses other than you are a representative of the cafe. You aren’t helping.
Mike Silva is a PAID consultant by VPC
The day his paycheck goes away is the day you’ll see him stop responding
A paid troll is no different than any other troll.
VPC/Mike: “As we’ve said, we’re not seeking a permit to add more in the back or upstairs.”
VPN/Cliff: VPC *did* seek a permit to use part of the upstairs. On Dec. 15, DPD ordered VPC to delete that request, because changing the residential zoning for that floor and the backyard requires a separate application. VPC or a future owner could file that application if the restaurant use is legalized. And, the residential zoning didn’t deter VPC from trying to open the patio to customers last summer.
VPC/Mike: “We already have a permit for the existing seats outside along Galer and 17th. And even for those, Ericka has made a concession to VPN’s concerns, so they will not be available to customers during dinner service.”
VPN/Cliff: We appreciate that Ericka is reducing evening capacity, and corresponding impacts on neighbors. Is it a “concession”? The City last fall told VPC that it *violates the permit* to serve food and beverages at sidewalk tables. The City also told VPC to reduce seating on 17th Ave E from 16, to the 8 allowed by the permit. Are the City’s rules are too restrictive? That’s beyond our control.
VPC/Mike: “As for the language about the back yard patio, if we are inadvertently vague, so are you.”
VPN/Cliff: The proposal we made in Sept. asks VPC to abide by some reasonable limits, and that VPC and its landlord create a legal document stating there will be no restaurant use of the backyard. As VPC knows, we wish to ensure that future owners won’t force us to again fight that use. We seek an outcome that works for both the restaurant and its neighbors.
Cliff Meyer, on behalf of Volunteer Park Neighbors
volparkneighbors@gmail.com +++ http://vpneighbors.wordpress.com
” Our city has zoning in order to promote that principle of greater good, so we can preserve residential areas.”
Your assumption, incorrect in my opinion, that the greater good of residential areas is enhanced by keeping places to eat and drink out of the residential areas…
There are plenty of places in the world where zoning ensures that residential areas must HAVE bars, cafes and restaurants to further foster the sense of community.
This part of Capitol Hill is not one of those places. Never has been. There are city processes in place, Amused,if you want to turn this neighborhood into one of those places.
Mike points out, above, that Ericka admits she made a mistake by opening a restaurant without understanding that the zoning did not allow it. VPC changed the neighborhood a lot — especially for the neighbors right next to it. The neighbors had no say, and they aren’t even trying to shut down VPC.
The neighbors’ blog says they are offering to back the restaurant change if VPC agrees to no patio use. Both sides compromise. The neighborhood gets the VPC, and the neighbors don’t have to live in a neighborhood that changed illegally underneath them.
Now, some neighbors want the back patio. Well, there are “plenty of places in the world where zoning ensures that residential areas must HAVE bars, cafes and restaurants to further foster the sense of community.”
I posted the other day about an argument between two people in front of the cafe. It was taken down because I did not understand how the rules worked on line. So I am sorry and I am trying to get better.
First I want to say again that I am still a loyal cafe customer and I hope they can legalize. But I still think the back patio is too much for this neighborhood. It would change how all of us live, even the people who like the idea of having the patio restaurant. I have lived in this neighborhood for years and years and I like our quiet, dignified life here.
Yes, I do go through life a little afraid of my shadow. I am from a different generation and we were taught to be afraid of our shadows or we would cause problems. That is who I am, just as young people are who your are. Let me be who I am.
I only spoke up, finally, because I think what the VPN neighbors are going through is too much, considering what another commenter said very well: the neighborhood changed illegally under our feet because of VPC. Some of that change is good, but it is very hard on those closest to VPC.
VPC should work with them to make it right.
Cliff,
We’re not going to negotiate in the comments, but I will correct factual errors.
1) We did have an upstairs office as part of the change of use application, however, DPD did not “order” us to remove a thing. We removed it ourselves.
Any future downstairs tenant could try to file an application for an upstairs office or a backyard use as part of any business downstairs. However given the downstairs grandfathered conditional use, the upstairs residential use, and the presumable neighbor opposition they would face, they would be highly unlikely to get it. So knowing those things, any future tenant would be unlikely to even consider trying. Plus, as stated, Ericka is willing to give assurances about future operations, and the city could make prohibiting such things a condition on the restaurant permit.
In addition, your assertion that a downstairs restaurant permit would in any way effect the likelihood of the city allowing these other things is just plain false. That’s not how zoning works. I invite you to discuss this with Scott Kemp of DPD in the upcoming meeting with him.
2) As for whether or not eliminating sidewalk seating at dinner service is a concession, I’d remind you that regardless of whether food or alcohol is served in those seats, they still could be in use for patron self-service during dinner. And your side would still have a complaint about them. So eliminating them is, in fact, a concession.
3) With respect to vagueness of language about the backyard, your September 2010 proposal states,
“Keep all customer eating and drinking and food preparation (cooking. barbecuing or similar activities) inside the building and maintain hours of operation as they have been this last summer.”
This does not substantively differ from the facts as they are now with respect to the backyard or my previous statements about it. As has been repeated for some time a) we are not seeking a backyard restaurant use permit b) Ericka is willing to provide assurances about future operations.
Mike,
Volunteer Park Cafe has been open for more than 4 years without the required zoning permit, including nearly 1 year since the City identified it as a violator. The City is allowing the restaurant to stay open until, at the least, the end of the process that *might* provide the correct permit.
That means a future owner of the business could learn from this example, and start using the patio without a permit. (Like VPC did.) Maybe the CIty would do something, maybe not. The neighbors don’t want to find out.
We have always been willing to live with — and enjoy — a legally compliant 40-seat restaurant, despite impacts involving noise, traffic, parking, cooking odors, garbage overflows and more.
We’re not willing to live with the possibility of 30 more seats on a patio or use of the 2nd floor, and the ensuing greater impacts on our families.
That is why we ask VPC and the property owner to sign a simple legal document clearly limiting the business to the first floor of the building, so that we can support the legalization of a reasonably sized restaurant from which our community can benefit forever.
Cliff Meyer
on behalf of Volunteer Park Neighbors