The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1921-06-03
Build That Hotel Yes!
But Only on Terms That
Are Fair to the "U"

THE UNIVERSITY REGENTS were RIGHT in rejecting
the hotel proposition submitted by the Metropolitan
Building company
They are NOT RIGHT if they consider the matter closed
ought not to be closed The regents should not allow
it be closed for s30O0OOO hotel the university
tract will prove great thing not only for the city Of Sc
attic, but for the university itself.
In the opinion of The Star, the original offer NOT
FAIR the university. But that does not gainsay the
fact that hotel most desirable asset for the university
tract The problem then is to get the hotel there on
the Metropolitan Building company lock horns and refuse
to negotiate for terms.
Nothing will improve the unversitys downtown holdings
lso much as fine large, fireproof hotel.
, Why?
Because this hotel would be the civic center of the city
many years. and would consequently attract to the uni
versty tract major traffic Without the hotel this cannot
be safely assumed si THERE @ Is NO MAJ g gsn
POSED This is the block bounded north and south by
University and Seneca ss and west and east by Fourth
and Fifth aves.
IN 1854 the present lease of the Metropolitan Building
company expires and the tract with all the buildings
it, revert to the university Will the university tract be
part of the major business district of Seattle at that time
or will it be secondary, third-rate district7
The certain way of insurng it major business
three 1ss IN million dollar hotel will do it. @-'~ 0
is to the advantage of the universtyto the GREAT
and LASTING advantage Of the uniyersty-o get such
hotel And it is for that that The Star cannot
urge too strongly that effort be spared in behalf of the
university to obtain this hotel -
EvER-fair to the Metropolitan Building company, but
MORE IMPORTANT, fair to the university
Building Co. has asked for several concessions Some
fair and not The fair should be accepted
the unfair rejected.
For instance the companys request for extension
10 years on the Metropolitan theatre, well the
hotel ste does not appear reasonable The Star does
believe it is entitled it. An extension the theatre
lease is not essential to the financing Of the hotel AND IT
CANNOT BE FINANCED EXCEPT ON A 50YEAR BASIS
THAT THERE IS ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR EXTEND
ING THE LEASE ANYWHERE ON THE TRACT.
IT, upon inquiry by the regents it should develop that
hotel of this type CAN be financed without extending the
lease term naturally there should be extension whatever
not the hotel site itself and not for single year.
Assuming that it be financed except on 5O-year
basis what then? The lease should be extended only
that portion of the tract which is essential for the hotel
THE COMPANY CLAIMS essential not only the hotel
site proper but also the side of Fourth ave. op
poste the hotel Here is planned to put heating plant
primarily for the hotel
The company claims the plant cannot be located on the
hotel site because the Metropolitan theatre makes alley
way impossible Opinion however, differs this point 1t
is contended by that the plant CAN be established in
the basement of the hotel IT, however the regents deter
this is not feasible, the company is entitled to an
tension the west side of Fourth The regents must de-
tene by expert opinion, what portion of the block is
needed for the heating plant and the extension should apply
only to that portion.
On the other hand might be of advantage the unver
sy to extend the lease the entire block il the
agrees to put up building it of the type of the White
Henry, Stuart and Cobb buildings
The rental for the extra 19 ought to be determined
by two apprasals, in 1858 and 1863 The
panys offer for appraisal in 1858 covering the
tire period
IF THESE THINGS be smoothed out there can then
be serious objection to extending the time 1925
to 1885 in which the company shall be bound replace
ent temporary structure with permanent buildings Other
wise there is serious objection for the university direct
financial interest here. a
AS matters stand now the company will be Obliged by
1925 to put permanent structures each less than three
stories HIGH five blocks of temporary structures if it
to continue collecting rentals on this property II it does